Search

This paper defines the European Students' Union (ESU) opinions on the topics related to internationalisation and learning mobility. This document is both an advancement and a cohesive overview of ESU's existing positions on internationalisation and mobility in higher education. This paper offers both definitions and elaborations on relevant policy areas, and should function as a framework and a guide for both students and other actors in higher education across Europe. This Policy Paper was adopted at the European Students' Union Board Meeting 76 in Sofia, Bulgaria.

European policy-making in vocational education and training (VET) needs to be supported by sound evidence. In this report, Cedefop has selected 36 indicators to quantify key aspects of VET and lifelong learning. The selection is based on their policy relevance and their importance in achieving the Europe 2020 objectives. The report accounts for challenges and opportunities arising from recent developments in the international statistical infrastructure and includes updated comparable data from the European statistical system. This publication should be regarded as a tool to help policy-makers better understand and assess VET developments in each country. While these indicators do not claim to assess national systems or policies, they could be used to reflect on countries' situations and progress towards the strategic objectives set for Europe. The indicators present statistical overviews from all European Union Member States, along with the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey. Contains an annex with a short description of indicators. [The HIVA Education and Lifelong Learning Research Group and the Centre for Educational Effectiveness and Evaluation, both at KU Leuven, carried out the underlying methodological and statistical work and updated the report.]

Designed to stimulate course planning teams to consider a wide range of technological options at the start of the course design process, this paper focuses on ways in which technology can be used to design, produce, and present European-wide distance education courses. The more detailed objectives of the paper are to look at how technology may facilitate the joint production of courses across different institutions in different countries; speed up course production; help in the delivery of courses to different target groups in different countries; and suggest prototype course designs that meet the challenge of the first three objectives and might attract some external funding. Factors to be considered in determining the suitability of technology for distance teaching are then considered, including access and availability to students, costs, teaching functions, interaction and user-friendliness, organizational constraints, and novelty. Scenarios for media use in European courses are also suggested; these include electronic publishing, videocassette courses, tutored video instruction, computer-mediated communication, and computer-based learning with videodiscs. The paper concludes by identifying several policy issues that need to be resolved by the European Association of Distance Teaching Universities before final choices can be made about the use of technology in European-wide courses. (5 references) (MES)

Many educators in high schools and colleges have taught about European history and politics in the context of the Cold War and the division of Europe into two blocs. The revolutionary changes in 1989 and the collapse of the Soviet Union have made obsolete the superpower spheres of influence that divided Europe. This curriculum project contributes to a refocusing on a reunited Europe as it has emerged since 1989. The project focuses on two central European nations, Hungary and Poland, and identifies important aspects about these countries for students as they begin to explore central Europe. It provides background information about central Europe in a curriculum review and poses the following question: "What's different about Central Europe?" The project outlines five key differences between western and central Europe to guide student understanding of the history and politics of this area. It concentrates on Hungary and Poland in a comparative historical perspective. This project cites the following considerations in analyzing democratic transitions in Hungary and Poland: (1) undermining and opening the authoritarian regime; (2) legacy of the past; (3) cycle of mobilization; (4) defusing and managing the military or party apparatus; (5) negotiation; and (6) settling past accounts. The paper notes sources for teaching contemporary politics in Hungary and Poland. (Contains 14 references.) (BT)