1. Heli Aru Estonian Ministry of Education and Researc Higher education in Estonia in 2020

2. 2 World’s Best Universities by Google map

3. Presentation outline What are the developments that characterise higher education policy in Estonia so far? What lessons can be drawn? What would we like to see in Estonian higher education in 2020? What should we do to achieve this? 3

4. Higher education reform proposal 2001: Problems The organisation of higher education in Estonia has become muddled The system of higher education is bloated and has no regard to the needs and trends of the labour market. There are too many institutions offering higher education studies Academic standards vary from one higher education institution to another Funding for higher education has not kept up with increases in the volume of educational provision and with inflation The system of social benefits intended for learners pursuing a higher education is ineffective and unnecessarily costly. Goals to create a system of development and funding of higher education that provides for a clear organisation of higher education and forges a strong link to labour market needs to integrate into the European Higher Education Area 4

5. Üleminek 3+2 õppekavade süsteemile 2002/03 õa; Üleminek lõpetajate põhisele rahastamisele 2002/03 õa, Varasema õpingute ja töökogemuse arvestuse (VÕTA) võimaluste seadustamine õppekava täitmise osana 2003, VV määrus nr 265 23. 10. 2003. a, “Ülikooli ja rakenduskõrgkooli ning nende õppekavade akrediteerimise kord ja akrediteerimisel esitatavad nõuded”, VV määrus nr. 76, 12.03.2003, “Diplomi ja akadeemilise õiendi statuut ja vormid”; VV määrus nr. 275, 23.08.2004, “Õppeasutuste antavate akadeemiliste kraadide nimetuste loetelu”; VV määrus nr. 120, 6.06.2005, “Eesti Vabariigi kvalifikatsioonide ja enne 20. augustit 1991.a. antud endise NSVL kvalifikatsioonide vastavus”; Omakapitalinõuete kehtestamine erakoolidele, 2005; VV määrus nr. 89, 6.04.2006, “Välisriigi haridust tõendatavate dokumentide hindamise ja akadeemilise tunnustamise ning välisriigi haridussüsteemis antud hariduskvalifikatsiooni nimetuse kasutuse tingimused ja kord”; VV määrus Kõrghariduse tasemel õpiväljundite määratlemine kõrgharidusstandardis, Sõltumatu kvaliteediagentuuri loomine, ühiskraadide ja –diplomite seadustamine, 2008; Üleminek 3-aastastele tulemuslepingutele, 2009; Üleminek õpitulemuste põhistele õppekavadele ja ECTS ainepunktisüsteemile, 2009; Ülikoolide kvaliteedilepe (2003) ühtsete kvaliteedistandardite kehtestamiseks. Leppe täitmise seire 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008. Riiklike mobiilsusmeetmete käivitamine 2002, sh Kristjan Jaagu programm, 2003 Akadeemik Jüri Engelbrechti juhitud rahvusvahelise töörühma soovitused kõrghariduse kvaliteedikindlustussüsteemi parandamiseks, 2005; Osalemine OECD projektis “Review on Tertiary Education Policies”, 2005-2007, Kõrgharidusstrateegia aastateks 2006-2015, kinnitatud 2006; Eesti kõrghariduse rahvusvahelistumise strateegiadokument, (2007), rahvusvahelistumise heade tavade lepe (2007), Eesti õpetajahariduse strateegia 2009-2013, kinnitatud 2009; “Kõrghariduse omandanute ja õpingud katkestanute sissetulekute võrdlus töötasult laekunud tulumaksu põhjal” (Klaris Uuringud OÜ, 2007; PRAXIS, 2005); “Analüüs erinevate koolitusvaldkondade lõpetanute seisundite kohta tööturul ametialade, haridustasemete ja majandusharude lõikes” (PRAXIS, 2005). ESF LÜKKA projekt 2005-2008: õppekavade, õpetamismeetodite, õppuritele suunatud ja õppetegevust toetavate praktika tugi- ning nõustamissüsteemide arendus Eestikeelsete kõrgkooliõpikute ja õppevahendite koostamise toetamine; Kõrghariduse Nõukoja töö käivitamine, 2008; ESF Primus programm - õppekavade sisehindamine, õppejõudude, õppekavaarenduse nõustajate võrgustiku loomine ja nõustajate koolitamine, (2008-2013); ERF rahastamisel perioodil 2007-2013 kõrgharidusobjektide ehitamist 590,2 miljoni krooni väärtuses. ESF DORA programm – Eesti kõrgkoolide rahvusvahelistumise tegevuste ja üliõpilaste mobiilsuse toetamiseks 2008-2013; ESF vahendite abil rahastatav programm Best 2007-2013; ESF Kõrgkoolide ja ettevõtete koostöö toetamine avatud taotlusvooru kaudu (2009-2013). 5

6. Declining numbers of higher education institutions:1990/91 to 2008/09 6

7. Eight years after adoption of the higher education reform proposal by the Cabinet of Ministers: Estonia has acceded to the EHEA; Still, many people believe that – the system of higher education is too large and does not reflect the needs and trends of the labour market; – there are too many institutions offering higher education studies, which leads to unnecessary duplication of programmes; – academic standards vary between different institutions Funding for higher education has not kept up with increases in the volume of educational provision and with inflation The current system of student allowances is widely regarded as out of tune with contemporary conceptions of fairness; Emphasis continues to be laid on increasing the output of PhD graduates and graduates of natural sciences, exact sciences and engineering; As a new topic, we have started to discuss the increasing problem of brain drain and need for further internationalisation. 7

8. What do we need? More strategic management on insitutional level; An increase in funding appropriations for higher education The change in a system of student allowances and loans. 8

9. Higher education in Estonia in 2020 Institutions seek to play out their relative strengths in Estonian as well as in the Baltic contexts. Estonia has maintained research competence in a broad spectrum of specialties. In research funding, emphasis is laid increasingly on links to the real needs of the Estonian society and economy. Students have a wide choice of educational programmes. The organisation of studies is founded on interdisciplinarity and problem- orientedness. International mobility flows are balanced. Centres of excellence in selected specialities in the Baltics. Within their ‘niche’, Estonian education institutions offer attractive study opportunities to international students. The principle of ‘two functional centres’ is supported in most disciplines. Cooperation with employers has improved. Universities are attractive places to work in. 9

10. Building on strengths Institutions can no longer evade ranking and related classification. Examples: U-map, THES and Shanghai rankings, etc. It will be wise to consider the trends and to use them in developing institutions more strategically; What criteria should be considered in defining an institution’s priority focus? – existing competence and projections of expected future impact; – favourable prospects – investing in the field is likely to yield a considerable impact; – synergy-building within the institution, harnessing the potential for cooperation betweern different units; – synergy-building with society – fields that are marked by interest for partnerships with international institutions, partnerships in Estonia and regional partnerships; – opportunities for raising additional resources from international providers or from Estonia; – …

11. Striking a balance between institutional autonomy and the public interest Strengthening the mandate of kuratoorium - governing body that consists of individuals coming from outside the institution. Powers of such body include – to determine the institution’s mission and its strategic and operational goals; – to appoint the rector, to assess his or her work and to support it; – to approve the budget and review its implementation. The principle of subsidiarity.

12. Reforms of the student allowances system Social mobility is a fundamental prerequisite for a democratic society to function; European education ministers in London (2007): “... We share the societal aspiration that the student body entering, participating in and completing higher education at all levels should reflect the diversity of our populations.” Each country is free to set its particular goals and to define a social dimension action plan. The system of student allowances and loans needs to be overhauled in order to allow students to focus on their studies, and to move to a different city/county, should this be necessary for them to pursue their chosen specialty. Allowances must have regard to the student’s social and financial background → in order to make the corresponding determinations, relevant information needs to be gathered. 12

14. A slide from the presentation by Hanna Kanep (May 2009): Funding per student in 2005 (OECD) 24370United States 14579Australia 12326Japan 10919Israel 10262New Zealand 9994Brazil 7606Korea 6620Chile 6402Mexico

15. Why can’t we just carry on as usual? 15

17. The problem is real! After all, why – in an open world – should anybody choose to study in Estonia? i-graduate survey results (2009) show that Estonia has a clear competitive advantage for international students. We need to build on these and advance other strengths → focus! Three areas where change is darely needed: Change in management model; Students focusing to studies; Increase in funding level.

18. Thank you! Questions or comments: Heli.Aru@hm.ee 18