Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.


Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "ENQA’S CONSULTATIVE MEMBERSHIP IN THE BFUG - WHAT DOES IT ENTAIL"— Presentation transcript:

ENQA’S CONSULTATIVE MEMBERSHIP IN THE BFUG - WHAT DOES IT ENTAIL? Emmi Helle Secretary General ENQA ENQA workshop, Brussels, 3 June 2009 Outcomes of the Leuven/Louvain-la-Neuve ministerial conference and expectations on the future of QA

2 History (1) European Pilot Project on Quality Assurance (1998) / EU recommendation Bologna Declaration (1999): [the objectives of primary relevance to establish EHEA…] “Promotion of European co-operation in quality assurance with a view to developing comparable criteria and methodologies”

3 History (2): Prague Communiqué (2001)
“Ministers recognised the vital role that quality assurance systems play in ensuring high quality standards and in facilitating the comparability of qualifications throughout Europe. They also encouraged closer cooperation between recognition and quality assurance networks. They emphasized the necessity of close European cooperation and mutual trust in and acceptance of national quality assurance systems[…] Ministers called upon the universities and other higher educations institutions, national agencies and the European Network of Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA), in cooperation with corresponding bodies from countries which are not members of ENQA, to collaborate in establishing a common framework of reference and to disseminate best practice.”

4 History (3): Berlin Communiqué (2003)
“At the European level, Ministers call upon ENQA through its members, in co-operation with the EUA, EURASHE and ESIB, to develop an agreed set of standards, procedures and guidelines on quality assurance, to explore ways of ensuring an adequate peer review system for quality assurance and/or accreditation agencies or bodies, and to report back through the Follow-up Group to Ministers in 2005.”

5 History (4): Bergen Communiqué (2005)
“We adopt the standards and guidelines for quality assurance in the European Higher Education Area as proposed by ENQA. […] We welcome the principle of a European register of quality assurance agencies based on national review. We ask that the practicalities of implementation be further developed by ENQA in cooperation with EUA, EURASHE and ESIB with a report back to us through the Follow-up Group. We underline the importance of cooperation between nationally recognised agencies with a view to enhancing the mutual recognition of accreditation or quality assurance decisions.”

6 History (5): London Communiqué (2007)
“The first European Quality Assurance Forum, jointly organised by EUA, ENQA, EURASHE and ESIB (the E4 Group) in 2006 provided an opportunity to discuss European developments in quality assurance. We encourage the four organisations to continue to organise European Quality Assurance Fora on an annual basis, to facilitate the sharing of good practice and ensure that quality in the EHEA continues to improve.” “We thank the E4 Group for responding to our request to further develop the practicalities of setting up a Register of European Higher Education Quality Assurance Agencies. […] We welcome the establishment of a register by the E4 group, working in partnership, based on their proposed operational model. […] We ask the E4 group to report progress to us regularly through BFUG, and to ensure that after two years of operation, the register is evaluated externally, taking account of the views of all stakeholders.”

7 Leuven Communiqué (2009) “We ask the E4 group (ENQA-EUA-EURASHE- ESU) to continue its cooperation in further developing the European dimension of quality assurance and in particular to ensure that the European Quality Assurance Register is evaluated externally, taking into account the views of the stakeholders.”

8 ENQA Consultative Membership in the Bologna Follow-Up Group (BFUG)
ENQA was approved as a consultative member, together with the EI and BusinessEurope (UNICE), at the Bergen ministerial meeting in 2005 EUA, EURASHE, ESU (ESIB), CoE and UNESCO-CEPES had been approved as consultative members already in Berlin in 2003 The “regular” members of the BFUG are member countries (46 signatories of the European Cultural Convention), represented by ministry officials European Commission is an “additional member”

9 How does the BFUG work? BFUG meets at least twice a year
presidency held by the EU Presidency, but this will change implementation of communiqués overall steering of the Bologna Process preparation of ministerial meetings BFUG Board oversees the work of the BFUG EUA, EURASHE, ESU, CoE and EC permanent members changing country representation

10 How does the BFUG work (2)
action lines / work programme according to the communiqué working groups stocktaking employability data collection EHEA in a global setting coordination groups LLL mobility qualifications frameworks social dimension

11 How does the BFUG work (3)
Bologna seminars, that are open to all interested do not have a fee provide a platform to discuss the issues more widely at least 100 participants ENQA organised its first Bologna seminar in December 2008 on QA of transnational education

12 ENQA’s role at BFUG meetings
participation in the discussions at BFUG meetings the BFUG working and coordination groups the elaboration of documents and definition of priorities the creation of stands and strategies of common interest (e.g. within the E4 Group)

13 ENQA’s role at the ministerial meetings
delivering statements on behalf of ENQA / E4 presenting views of ENQA in plenary as regards the communiqué representation has grown from 2 to 5

14 ENQA’s political role has grown
Consequences ENQA’s political role has grown ability to represent the members better has a say in the formulation of documents and priorities also the responsibilities have increased ESG external reviews EQAR



Similar presentations

Ads by Google