ESU firmly believes in the fundamental values that underpin the Bologna process, namely academic freedom (EHEA, 2020), student and staff participation in higher education governance, institutional autonomy, responsibility for and of higher education and academic integrity (EHEA, 2024). These values, accompanied by a clear commitment to human rights and democracy are a prerequisite for an educational system that aims at contributing to the future of our society as a whole. 

Unfortunately, despite these commitments of EHEA member states, Europe is experiencing a democratic backsliding which also takes place in and affects higher education systems. Attacks on academic freedom have risen unprecedentedly in recent years (AFi, 2024). Further efforts to protect student rights (ESU, 2024 Student Rights Charter) such as access to quality public education, freedom of learning, engagement in higher education governance without the fear of repercussions and persecution, and personal safety are needed. To this end, ESU welcomes the development of a monitoring system of the fundamental values within the framework of the EHEA. Member states continuously undermining the fundamental values of the Bologna Process need to be confronted with consequences for their actions.

2. Student participation

Student participation is crucial for upholding fundamental values and student and human rights in higher education. As the main and direct beneficiaries of education and, also, the largest group within the academic community, students should be included in all decision-making processes – both formal and informal – that shape their educational and social lives. Their firsthand experience makes them key stakeholders in evaluating and improving the academic environment. Involving students also strengthens community cohesion, making their engagement essential at every stage of decision-making.

ESU advocates for a higher education governance system that fosters effective, meaningful and democratic students’ participation at all levels. The key to achieving this aim is a student representation body that reflects the diversity of the student population. To effectively carry out their representation mission, political independence, financial autonomy, democracy and the right to manage and administer their own affairs are a prerequisite for student representative bodies.  Thus, public authorities need to ensure that student representative bodies can be run and managed entirely by students, with decision-making power vested solely in the student body, free from interference by external entities such as academic staff, public authorities, political parties, or religious groups. A framework for financial independence is equally crucial, ensuring that student organisations can self-govern and pursue their goals without outside influence or restrictions.

European higher education governance is distinguished by its commitment to collegiality, a model that acknowledges the shared purpose of students and academic staff in shaping higher education systems (Klemencic, 2015). Today, this concept has evolved into a partnership model, founded on the shared responsibility of all members of the academic community in higher education governance. Democratically elected student representatives, through active communication with their peers via student unions, can effectively contribute to governance. Likewise, academic staff are expected to engage with their constituents in the same manner, ensuring collaborative and inclusive decision-making.

To avoid tokenisation, it must be ensured that student representatives are actively involved, and not mere observers, and have the right to partake in the decision making process, with equal rights to contribute, equal voting rights compared to other stakeholder groups and the right to access all information necessary, in a timely manner, to make informed, educated decisions. Special attention is to be paid to the needs of international staff and students to enable their engagement.

While de jure provisions may guarantee student participation, it is equally important to encourage and support students in engaging. Serving as a student representative requires significant personal, mental, physical, time, and financial commitment. Barriers to participation lead to a lack of diversity in representative bodies, particularly among marginalised and minority groups. To enable meaningful involvement, financial support should be provided so that no student representative incurs personal costs. Student representation as informal learning should be recognized as an extracurricular activity and rewarded with ECTS points and supported by policies that, when necessary and adequate, excuse absences from academic activities to allow full participation in representation duties. Higher education institutions should provide flexible solutions, such as tuition-free tolerance semesters, to accommodate full-time student representatives who may need to pause their studies.

Notably, in recent years, student representatives and unions have been experiencing an increase in attacks against them (ESU, 2024). Student representatives must be protected from political persecution and academic repercussions resulting from their commitments. No student should face penalties for their engagement. HEIs and public authorities must ensure campus integrity and establish local, national, and European reporting procedures for any threats to student safety, especially for representatives. 

Lastly, student unions themselves must apply democratic principles to guide their activities and coordinate the efforts of elected student representatives and ensure that representatives keep students informed about their activities, upholding transparency. They are also responsible for addressing any violations of these principles by their representatives.

3. Academic Freedom and Institutional autonomy

ESU firmly believes that the core public responsibility of higher education institutions is to pursue variety and to produce and transmit knowledge, both for the long-term improvement of society and to promote the self-creation of individual students in realising their full potential as human beings. Higher education, through both teaching and learning, as well as the application of evidence-based reasoning and the principle of argumentation rooted in the scientific method, serves as a key pillar for safeguarding and promoting democratic and liberal values. It plays a crucial role in combating disinformation, polarisation, and hate speech both within and beyond academic institutions. 

Notably, higher education can only fulfil its democratic mission, if academic freedom as a prerequisite for all fundamental values underpinning higher education is ensured.  To this end, the academic community needs to have the conditions provided by public authorities that allow them to exercise their academic freedom, including institutional autonomy and student and staff participation in democratic governance.

A balance has to be struck between academic freedom and institutional autonomy vis-a-vis public responsibility for higher education and student and staff participatory democratic rights. Overly rigid control by public authorities can harm transparency, management, and performance, ultimately undermining the core responsibilities of HEIs. Legal frameworks should not undermine the fundamental values of higher education. At the same time, accountability needs to be ensured, especially as publicly funded higher education bears responsibility towards society. This accountability should be ensured through compliance with minimum quality standards and adherence to principles established at the national and European level, with quality assurance agencies monitoring and assessing how higher education institutions meet these requirements.

Higher education and research institutions should  be enabled to steer themselves in respect of their internal organisation and governance, the internal distribution of financial resources, and the design and implementation of learning, teaching, and research. At the same time, staffing, organisational, financial and academic affairs related autonomy should never be at the expense of students, especially with regard to admission systems, curriculum design and study fees and forms of financial support such as scholarships and grants. Policies and strategies relating to the fundamental values should be developed by the institutions within the framework of broader policies set by public authorities that ensure democratic principles and the interests of the public. However, this should not result in a too rigid control of HEIs by public authorities as this goes against the principles of democratic self-governance and may reduce transparency. Therefore, continuous trust-based dialogue based on the principles of collegiality and co-creation between public authorities, HEI leadership and the different parts of the academic community  must be established to continuously revise and balance the different rights, needs and requirements against each other.

While academic freedom shares elements with freedom of speech, the two principles are not the same, as academics have a responsibility to adhere to principles of academic integrity, including the upholding of scientific standards, respect for others, ethical conduct, and the impact of teaching and research on people and the environment. A culture of debate and inquiry should be promoted, enabling students and scholars to think critically and challenge established views, which is essential for open academic communities. It is important to remember that the right to criticise and/or protest, even the academic institution one is part of, is a crucial tenet of both academic freedom and freedom of speech.

Defending academic freedom and institutional autonomy requires not only the HE community but also public support. This global challenge is key to fostering sustainable, inclusive societies. Without such support, scholars, students, and institutions become vulnerable to attacks from state and non-state actors, undermining education systems and restricting free thought, ultimately harming social, cultural, and economic development, as well as efforts toward sustainable transition. Collaboration with academic actors and stakeholders who do not defend academic freedom and who support or enable human rights violations is to be discontinued.

Lastly, it has to be emphasised that the freedom to learn, along with students’ rights to autonomous self-organisation and representation within higher education governance and campus integrity, are integral components of academic freedom for students at both individual and collective levels. However, across Europe, the freedom to learn is rarely recognized in constitutions or higher education laws, whereas the freedom of science and teaching is more commonly protected. This creates a legal hierarchy that disadvantages students. To address this imbalance, the freedom to learn and students’ rights to participate in higher education governance must be equally enshrined in constitutional and other relevant legal frameworks.

4. Responsibility for HE

The quality, accessibility, and equity of higher education depend significantly on funding. Education should not be viewed solely as a tool for enhancing economic competitiveness; it also fosters tolerance, inclusion, democracy, critical thinking, personal fulfilment, and lifelong learning. These broader objectives must be considered when allocating funds.

Funds for higher education should be seen as investments in public good and responsibility, rather than mere expenses. Sufficient financing is essential for institutions to fulfil their diverse missions while maintaining their independence to operate with integrity and high quality.

Public funding must provide stability and sustainability in higher education development, focusing on long-term goals rather than short-sighted financial gains. It should also avoid prioritizing short-sighted job market demands that focus solely on short-term financial gain. Additionally, necessary financial and legislative frameworks should be established to promote cooperation at local, regional, national, European and international levels, among higher education institutions, research institutes and other relevant institutions. Recent developments, including the internationalisation of higher education, the demand for quality and innovative teaching methods, diverse economic interests in higher education, digitalization, and the need for updated technologies, have significantly impacted the required level of financial support. Failing to address these changes can have serious long-term consequences. 

Commodification

Commodification is changing the perception of higher education from a public good and public responsibility to a private and limited commodity. This change fosters a customer mentality and encourages a for-profit approach to investment in education. But education is not a commodity and narratives that reduce people to numbers or customers must be resisted, reminding policymakers of the multiple purposes of education, which benefits society beyond economic outcomes. This also applies to education not being included in trade agreements. ESU calls for a carve-out of public and private education from European proposals for trade and services agreements and their negotiations, and calls for its explicit exclusion from the EU, EEA and EFTA trade agreements. ESU strongly believes that the responsibility to make full reservation on education in trade policies and agreements lies both with the EU and national governments (ESU, 2019). 

Performance-based funding

Funding allocated according to the performance of education institutions (such as the number of graduates or ECTS points granted) is used as a steering tool, and it should be developed in close collaboration with student representatives while allowing for flexibility and choice, and implemented only after a thorough analysis and monitoring of the potential negative incentives it gives to the decision makers in the HEIs. Funding based on the number of degrees completed on schedule or ECTS points obtained can give higher education institutions an incentive to rush students through their education at the cost of quality. 

ESU strongly advises that such output factors, if used at all, should not only be based on quantity, but should also take into account integral aspects of academic and student life, notably diversity in the student population, size of the HEI, and regional differences and location, the disciplinary profile/specialisation. 

When the performance-based funding model is used, it should be ensured that the fiscal stability of higher education institutions’ funding is not compromised, institutional autonomy is preserved, and that institutions are not overburdened with excessive reporting requirements, and that the core funding of different disciplines or academic fields is safeguarded. Nevertheless, transparency in funding allocation must be a priority, ensuring that information is easily accessible to students and their representatives. Students should also play an active role in defining the performance indicators, drawing on their experiences as direct beneficiaries of education and related services. Furthermore, contrary to a one-size-fits-all indicator system, a certain degree of flexibility is required in order for HEIs to be able to identify issues in need of improvement relevant for the HEI and encompass the possibility to reflect the diverging needs for improvements between faculty/department levels as well. Thus, performance-based funding, if applied, should be at least dialogue based, ensuring the inclusion of students in discussions at all levels and allowing for adjustments to prevent negative side effects.

Education free of tuition fees

Public investment has had the largest drop across EU countries in recent years (Commission, 2024), with policy measures transforming education from a protected public service into a target for funding cuts. This prioritisation of short-term savings over long-term accessibility undermines the right to education. To consolidate budgets, more and more countries and HEIs are introducing tuition fees, shifting the financial burden onto students. This approach poses a substantial barrier to the right to education as well as the connected right to choose an occupation freely, especially given the diverse socio-economic backgrounds of students. Tuition fees disproportionately impact those from lower-income families, making access to education more selective (ESU, 2020). All education must become and/or remain free of tuition fees for all students, regardless of nationality or background (ESU, 2023).

The imposition of high fees on international students, particularly those from non-EU/EEA countries, is unethical and discriminatory. Such fees hinder internationalisation and create barriers for migrants and refugees, contradicting the principles of mobility and the spirit of the Bologna Process. Public authorities must address the unequal treatment of international students regarding tuition fees by establishing a fair legislative and administrative framework.

ESU is committed to promoting accessible and sustainably funded higher education, viewing tuition fees not as a funding method, but rather as an unfair and unsustainable burden. Where fees exist, “socio-economic tuition scholarships” should be provided to cover both direct and indirect costs, ensuring access for all societal levels. The cost of tuition should not be higher for individuals who already hold a degree.

Tuition-free education should not only be seen as a means to enhance graduate employability. Higher education institutions and policymakers must strive for inclusive and publicly funded education systems that adequately prepare students for life beyond their studies, while ensuring access for diverse groups, including individuals from various socio-economic backgrounds, refugees, international students and non-traditional students.

Public investments in higher education institutions and Public-Private-Partnerships

Legal frameworks and policy strategies in higher education must protect the rights of scholars and students, safeguarding academic freedom and preventing two-speed systems. The autonomy of funding decisions by research councils and funding bodies should be respected to ensure research diversity. True academic freedom and high-quality tertiary education depend on sufficient public funding to cover operational costs.

Under the New Public Management paradigm, the push for diversified funding sources has been misused to justify cuts in public investment in education, increasing reliance on private financing. This shift threatens academic autonomy and independence, as funders may seek to influence institutional priorities. Therefore, third party funding should only serve as a supplement to public funding and public authorities must establish regulations for these income sources to prevent economic interests from dictating funding decisions. Donors should cover the full costs of the research they support rather than using partially funded projects to redirect public research funds toward narrow commercial interests.

Additionally, the European Council of Higher Education and EHEA members must establish clear guidelines and a roadmap for Academia-Industry relations (Public-Private Partnerships). This roadmap should prioritise academic needs over private and for-profit interests, ensuring that industry partnerships create mutual benefits while safeguarding the independence of research and learning through sustained public investment and transparent management of private funds.

Rankings

Rankings can both have positive and negative effects, depending heavily on the design and the underlying purpose of the ranking.

HEI rankings are highly subjective and vary based on chosen indicators, failing to capture the diversity of higher education institutions (e.g. different profiles, demographics, location, etc.). A high ranking does not necessarily reflect an institution’s overall quality across all research fields or study programs. Thus, while rankings can support students to find an institution that fits their wanted profile through accessible and comparable information, this is only truthfully achievable if rankings consider a diverse range of student-centred parameters and are based on programme or at least faculty levels. 

Originally designed under the auspices of New Public Management (i.e. aims tied to commodification) rather than student guidance,rankings heavily impact higher education financing. Especially in performance-based funding systems, HEIs that outperform others in specific metrics (most commonly a mix of student numbers, graduates, research publications, and ability to attract third-party funding or women in leadership roles) will receive more money, shifting HEIs’ strategic focus toward improving these metrics at the expense of others (e.g. student wellbeing, diversity, community outreach, student and staff participation, green campuses or ethics).

Consequently, HEIs put more focus on research in their strategic governance, deprioritising learning and teaching. In addition, the limited flexibility in adapting indicators to the specific needs of HEIs based on what is actually relevant to the specific institutions has side effects. Institutions may face a dilemma between improving metrics that the ranking system rewards instead of improving uncommon metrics such as student wellbeing or inclusivity (given the effects of rankings on HEI funding).

Lastly, international rankings favour well-established, wealthy HEIs, especially in regions that align with the Anglo-Saxon or Chinese HEI models, putting smaller and less wealthy institutions at a disadvantage. Regional biases in rankings further exacerbate inequalities between HEIs, both globally and even within Europe. Rankings influence a perception of better or worse HEIs, contributing to brain drain and shaping employers’ views on the value of degrees depending on the rewarding HEIs. Ultimately, the commodification of higher education, driven by rankings, has deepened disparities between institutions. 

At the same time, rankings can push HEIs to become more accountable due to comparability, which is why a balanced and holistic approach regarding parameters and rankings with different foci is needed to curb the current dominance of commodification driven rankings. Rankings should support learners’ choices and evaluate the quality of education rather than being tools of institutional prestige.

5. Responsibility of HE

Education is a core institution of our society and one of the main pillars of modern civilisation. It plays a central role in social and economic development, democratic empowerment and the advancement of the general well-being of societies, while also contributing to the ecological transition and the fight against climate change. Higher education institutions produce not only new research and highly skilled graduates but also have the responsibility to communicate their knowledge to the surrounding world and collaborate with businesses, public institutions, and other organisations and movements in their surrounding community. In order to fulfil this role, HEIs have to meet a set of obligations towards the broader society, of which they are a part.

For centuries, HEIs have been a space for democratic discussion, freedom of expression, research and learning, participatory governance, and international solidarity. These and other aspects of the fundamental values must remain at the core of higher education. HEIs have an obligation to integrate these into every aspect of their operations, and make sure that the fundamental values are respected, furthered, and implemented.

Higher education as a public good

Open and equal access to all levels of education is a prerequisite for individual and societal development and well-being. Access to higher education for all creates social mobility of which a democratic, merit-based society is dependent, as  there is a significant positive relationship between education, employment, and income.  Equal access to higher education should be provided to everyone (ESU, 2023), independent of their background or financial status. Higher education is a human right, which is guaranteed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

Higher education has an obligation to continuously interact with the society of which it is a part. This includes equal access to higher education for all citizens,  proactive work to make knowledge and research results available to the general public, and researching topics which are of interest and value to other parts of society, and ensuring collaboration and consultation with society through representatives such as public authorities, NGOs, initiative groups and citizens. However, the latter does not mean that all research has to be of interest to others or fall under the category of specialised applied research. Basic research also remains a core activity of HEIs. Producing knowledge for the sake of knowledge is an integral part of higher education, but it must be balanced with its obligation to contribute to the development of free and democratic societies and the wellbeing of their citizens.

Active citizenship education and education for democracy

Active citizenship education and education for democracy aim to increase civic engagement and societal participation. Active citizenship education equips individuals with the knowledge, skills, and values necessary to participate actively in their communities and broader society (ESU, 2024). Education for democracy, on the other hand, focuses on preparing individuals to understand, appreciate, and engage with democratic institutions, values, and processes. This is especially crucial in times of rising polarisation and hate speech accompanying the backsliding of democracy in Europe. Study programs should thus integrate elements through student-centred learning regarding the defence and promotion of human rights, democracy and the rule of law. 

Sustainability

ESU believes in the importance of sustainability in higher education (2019, 2023, 2024), and, as stated in the Magna Charta Universitatum (2020), that HEIs have a responsibility to engage with and respond to the aspirations and challenges of the world, to benefit humanity and contribute to sustainability. This is an obligation that should be reflected in all aspects of HEIs, including education, research, institutional practices and governance. Meaningful contributions to a greener and better world necessitate cooperation between institutions and disciplines, concrete planning and reporting, sufficient funding and meaningful involvement of students and staff.

Sustainable development and active citizenship are crucial parts of the public responsibility of higher education and key in empowering students to shape a sustainable future. Institutions should integrate Education for Sustainable Development (ESDs) holistically across all programs, ensuring graduates are equipped to tackle climate and ecological crises and foster democratic, inclusive, and socially sustainable societies. All students shall acquire up-to-date knowledge about global and local challenges, as well as the knowledge and skills to contribute to solutions within their field.

Internships

ESU considers internships an educational pathway that fosters work-based learning, by allowing students to put theory into practice as a means to equip students with relevant knowledge and experience regarding their field of study (ESU, 2019 and 2023). All degrees should allow for the students to obtain relevant work experience through internships, traineeships or apprenticeships as part of the degree.

As a part of a student’s education, internships should be relevant to the respective field of study, and be carried out with qualified supervision and mentorship from both their workplace and higher education institution. Student interns should not be used as free or cheap labour, and all educational internships, both as a part of formal education and outside of it, should be included in the ban on unpaid internships.

Disciplinary Orthodoxy

Academic fields often have structures that are shaped by dominant ideas, methods, and standards. This can be a challenge for scholars who want to question the mainstream or explore new ideas, as they may be pushed to the margins. Some disciplines, especially in the humanities, face criticism for using methods like case studies or small-scale research, which focus on specific events or groups, but these approaches are still valuable. Scholars have a responsibility to encourage new ideas and perspectives, promote openness to different approaches, and work across disciplines. This is essential for advancing knowledge and improving both research and teaching while staying true to the scientific method.

Diversity in academia

In order to generate and disseminate knowledge that accurately reflects the world we live in, researchers, educators, technical staff and leaders need to have varied backgrounds, allowing them to include a variety of experiences in their work and reflecting the diversity of society at large.

Diversity in higher education does not happen by itself. Proactive measures are needed in order to challenge the existing power dynamics and promote the inclusion of underrepresented groups. It is necessary to foster an environment that challenges gender stereotypes and breaks down glass ceilings for marginalised and underrepresented groups, including persons from non-academic backgrounds, disabled and racialised persons. Universities should ensure that individuals from all backgrounds have equal opportunities to enter into and advance in careers in academia. HEIs should actively promote equality through inclusive and intersectional leadership and governance structures. 

Open research

ESU believes in an Open Science culture that encourages collaboration, transparency, and the dissemination of research to benefit society as a whole. Publicly and partially publicly funded research, research data and teaching materials should be available to everyone. Researchers should be adequately enumerated for their research, and the intellectual property of research should remain with the author. The creator should publish both data and paper under public copyright licences to improve open education in general. HEIs and local communities should discover possibilities to cooperate more on research projects that would work for the development of communities. 

The funding provided for research, be it coming from domestic or EU sources, should always cover the cost of peer-reviews, in order to support the accessibility for researchers to open-access publications.

Lifelong learning

HEIs have a responsibility to ensure that education is not only accessible to traditional degree students, but also to people who need upskilling, reskilling or just want to learn more throughout their lives. These students need access to programs and courses which are more flexible and adaptable with respect to scheduling, teaching, and preferably tailored curriculum for people with existing experience from professional life. In addition, higher education should be integrated in a whole-system approach to education, fostering synergies between all levels of education and formal and informal learning environments. HEIs primary focus should be on degree education and the development of lifelong learning offerings should not lead to a reduction of resources in degree education.

Working Conditions of Academic Staff

ESU is concerned about the fact that academic staff are increasingly hired on short-term contracts and working much more than full time because they have to constantly fundraise for their own job through grants (ESU, 2024). This takes valuable time away from focusing on high-quality research and teaching as well as threatens academic freedom due to the dependency on public-private partnerships. Furthermore, the lack of job security and the over-burdening of staff threatens their mental health and contributes to employment inequality as those who are unable to work extra hours due to e.g. caring responsibilities or health fall behind in the highly competitive “publish or perish” working environment. This is not only unhealthy and unfair, but it also harms the quality of research and education. Time spent on teaching and on contributing to the democratic structures of higher education institutions must be valued and made space for in contracts.

While student jobs in higher education provide valuable income and a pathway into academia, they often come with insecure contracts and power imbalances that disadvantage students. The issue is even more pronounced for doctoral students, who face exploitation as their employers also control their academic assessments, creating a dependency that can affect their future careers. Ensuring fair conditions for doctoral students is essential. These jobs should meet minimum standards for good working conditions. Additionally, outsourcing non-academic staff also leads to exploitation and frequent violations of workers’ rights, especially for those on temporary contracts.

Good working conditions go beyond fair pay and job security—they also require a safe and inclusive environment. Higher education institutions must implement strong protections against discrimination and gender-based violence, including clear reporting mechanisms and decisive actions to address violations, upholding thus academic integrity.

6. Academic integrity

Academic integrity is essential to quality education and a safeguard of academia. Tackling academic fraud (i.e. any action that can undermine the fairness, trust and integrity of academic processes) requires collaboration among students, teachers, researchers, administrative staff, and policymakers. Fraud-free education builds trust, and academic fraud undermines the fairness and integrity of the academic process.

Legal frameworks and transnational collaboration

Academic integrity transcends national boundaries and has implications for the trust between higher education systems. Therefore, transnational collaboration is crucial to ensure consistent policies and standards. Both academic and non-academic institutions (such as private businesses offering illegal services) can undermine academic integrity, making it necessary for higher education institutions and public authorities to take legal steps to safeguard these standards. Notably, the rise of AI and digitalization has fueled essay mills, diploma mills, and contract cheating, which require coordinated efforts among national regulators, HEIs, legal authorities, and international bodies to address. 

Comparable data should be collected on national levels in collaboration with HEIs (taking into account GDPR) in order to develop effective policies. Peer-learning activities for and between institutions should be promoted. Quality assurance processes should integrate a focus on academic integrity systematically.

Student Involvement in Policy Creation and Misconduct Frameworks

Student involvement in creating frameworks for addressing misconduct and participating in investigations and disciplinary actions is a prerequisite of academic integrity, as their experiences and views are essential for policy-creation, investigations and support structures and ensures trust of students in the processes. Measures in case of misconduct should be proportional as especially students are learners who may make mistakes, notwithstanding their responsibility to respect principles of academic integrity. HEIs need to stand in solidarity with victims and witnesses and deliver transparent and timely investigation leading to concrete outcomes and measures.

Power Abuse and Zero-Tolerance Policy

Abuse of power within academia, particularly cases of sexual harassment, blackmail, or bullying, demands swift and transparent action from higher education institutions. Power imbalances between staff and students, as well as between senior staff and subordinates, necessitate a zero-tolerance approach to combat such abuses. Discrimination and harassment can also occur among peers, and HEIs must stand in solidarity with victims and witnesses, ensuring timely investigations that lead to concrete outcomes. Anonymized data of these investigations, including numbers of persons involved, time of investigation and results should be collected to ensure accountability and informed policy-making. 

Ethics Committees and Ombudspersons

To ensure high ethical standards and mainstream public responsibility, higher education institutions and public authorities must establish ethics/disciplinary committees and clear guidelines in the form of a Code of Ethics/Conduct. These committees must include democratically elected student representatives, as full members, with complete access to all the information.

Ethics committees should be operationalized as structures that oversee academic integrity, ethical conduct of all teaching and learning-related activities, but also extracurricular activities that involve members of the academic community, research safety, and possible negative impacts of research on society at large, encompassing social, economic and ecological concerns. They should have the authority to act independently, including self-initiated investigations. Higher education institutions have the responsibility of informing students about the ethics committees, the codes of conduct and reporting mechanisms. Teaching and administrative staff should be trained for prevention and early intervention in ethical breaches.

For fair student treatment, institutions need transparent, accessible channels for complaints that ensure confidentiality and protect complainants of negative consequences, covering issues from unfair exams to sexual misconduct and whistleblowing. Ombudspersons should act as neutral mediators, ensuring students are informed about complaint processes and campus policies on harassment and discrimination and that they receive proper care before, during and after procedures. Student representative bodies should be involved in the selection process of ombudspersons and there should be procedures in place in case ombudspersons lose the trust of students.

Preventing discrimination requires a cultural shift where power dynamics do not hinder reporting or create fear of retaliation. Confidential, independent, and anonymous reporting mechanisms are essential. Ombudspersons should track complaint trends and recommend policy changes to HEIs and public authorities, ensuring fairness and safety on campus.

Promoting Academic Integrity

Academic integrity should be promoted by the entire academic community, encompassing mandatory training for both students and staff, alongside measures such as diverse teaching methods, student-centred learning connected to learning outcomes, and clear sanctions for misconduct. Transparent and accessible information on academic integrity must be provided to students, and anonymous evaluation systems as an internal quality assurance tool should be implemented to provide feedback but also hold teachers accountable through measures in case of strong underperformance. Lastly, a culture that allows students to make mistakes is needed, as academic pressure connected to a non-existing error culture fosters misconduct.

Leadership and training

Higher education institutions must recognize and support the role of academic leaders, fostering a relationship of trust and professionalism between leaders and the wider academic community both between staff and between staff and students. Leaders should be capable of setting strategic priorities and resolving conflicts, a challenge often heightened when they are elected from within their peers. Special attention must also be given to the growing prevalence of online misinformation, especially on social media platforms.

Academic leadership should be viewed as a valuable career progression, and those interested should be supported in developing the necessary skills. Recruitment for these roles should be open, transparent, and inclusive, ensuring equal opportunities for all qualified candidates, including those from outside the institution.

Learning Analytics, Data Privacy and Fair Use of Digital Tools

Learning analytics involves collecting and analysing student data to optimise learning experiences. Discussions on AI-based tools in learning analytics must prioritise protecting student rights and personal data. Students’ data should not be used for marketing or research without clear consent, and any AI-based tools should only be used based on active opt-in choices without consequences, if a student doesn’t opt in It should always be possible to opt out at a later point if a student changes their mind. Only students’ data relevant for the learning analysis should be collected.

AI and digital tools can have many positive effects for students and staff. However, digital tools should only assist in education and not replace human judgement. AI systems, while efficient, can reflect biases from their creators, underscoring the need to carefully monitor their use. HEIs must ensure that AI does not perpetuate biases or unfairly penalise certain student groups (ESU 2024).

Particular attention is needed for online exam proctoring, where personal data privacy is violated on a regular basis. Thus, proctoring should always come with non-privacy invasive alternatives.

Intellectual Property

Students and researchers alike hold intellectual property rights (i.e., all intangible creations of the mind that can be protected by legislation under patent, copyright and/or trademark laws) and thus have the full rights to exercise all the benefits derived from it.

Higher education institutions must foster a culture that enables students, researchers, and teachers to produce original creations, inventions, and discoveries as part of their activities, both within and outside of classes. A learning environment that allows the dissemination of knowledge provides students with the opportunity to be productive and create intellectual property. At the same time, their ownership of intellectual property should be fully protected and respected.

From the outset of their higher education, students should learn to develop and protect intellectual property through integrated copyright and intellectual property training in the curriculum. It should be mandatory for HEIs to develop clear guidelines and communication on intellectual property. These guidelines should be co-created with student representatives and be easily accessible to all students, emphasising the importance of their ownership of intellectual property and valuing their achievements in accordance with legislation. Policies must mandate a consensual agreement on intellectual property ownership before students begin their research, ensuring HEIs do not misuse their dominant position over students. Students should have the right to opt out of having their written assignments processed by anti-plagiarism software, as this practice can unintentionally infringe upon their intellectual property rights by utilising their work without proper consent.

Acknowledging the need for HEIs to establish agreements with students regarding shared intellectual property ownership when students significantly use institutional facilities for creation, students have intellectual property rights. Study contracts that require students to unconditionally transfer their intellectual property rights to HEIs or corporations must be abolished, as they diminish the role of students. Any violation of student ownership of intellectual property is considered unethical and constitutes academic misconduct, warranting prosecution by academic integrity bodies.

Public-Private Partnerships: Ethics of Internships and Intellectual Property 

Cooperation between HEIs and industries can expand student opportunities through quality internships and real-world projects. Workplace learning should be learning-based, provide proper guidance, fairly paid, and aligned with labour standards, including social security and legal contracts. The practice of using internships to cut employment costs or replace paid jobs is unethical and must end.

Engagement of HEIs with industry partnerships must remain voluntary, transparent, and prioritise students’ competencies and skills development as education should serve broader societal needs, not just economic ones. Industry influence on joint research and teaching content should be limited, with intellectual property agreements between students, HEIs, and industry partners safeguarding the intellectual property produced during the workplace learning period.

Scholarships provided by industry should cover the full duration of a study program without being contingent on periodic results. Students should not face repayment obligations or extended work terms tied to such scholarships, ensuring their freedom to pursue education without undue pressure or retaliation for unwanted results. Furthermore, students should not be offered industry scholarships that require reimbursement of financial support, whether in monetary terms or through an excessive work commitment, as this could restrict their opportunities and compel them to accept financial aid to continue their education.

7. Solidarity 

Solidarity between students and from broader society is required to ensure a universal right to access higher education. In the era of diverse student mobility, particularly with global education’s increased prominence, many students more frequently move between jurisdictions. In the spirit of a community of knowledge, on both a global and European level, initiatives such as European university alliances and global exchange programs emphasize the importance of upholding fundamental values beyond national borders. Indeed, a threat to academia anywhere around the globe undoubtedly impacts academia as a whole. Enabling and accepting different standards of academic and fundamental values, would threaten the whole realisation of the previously developed principles. Therefore, the global student community should feel concerned and engage when fundamental values, such as the one enshrined in the Student Rights Charter (ESU, 2024), are at risk. Through solidarity actions, students do not only exchange best practices and build capacity to overcome those challenges, they also represent an engaged and determined civil society actively fighting for student rights. By doing so, students reaffirm and reinform the values they are promoting. 

Additionally, it is important to reiterate the rights of students to raise their voices on topics that indirectly impact higher education, but due to their nature impacts students and their right to education, such as for instance, wars and international conflicts, major crisis (eg. climate change), major infringement of fundamental rights.

However, solidarity also encompasses supporting students at risk and refugee students. Indeed, special support should be granted to students that are being persecuted because of their involvement in student representatives’ bodies. Therefore, special procedures should be put in place in order to enable those students to pursue their study programs in a safe environment, whether it be at national level or by welcoming them in safe countries, through some programs such as the “student at risk” program. It is fundamental that those programs are not only implemented at national level, but also encouraged by international bodies such as the Council of Europe or the European Union. 

Finally, in a sense of inclusivity, solidarity and common responsibility to the academic community, it is necessary to guarantee that every student gets granted the right and the effective possibility to study in the country they are located. This concerns particularly the rights of refugee and forcibly displaced students.  

Annexed positions:

• Statement on Commodification
• Statement on Sustainability
• Statement on education for sustainable development
• Statement on sustainability of higher education
• Statement: Ensure Quality Internships,Traineeships and Apprenticeships in Europe
• Statement on quality and fair Internships
• Policy paper on Social Dimensions
• ESU’s position on sustainable and attractive academic careers
• ESU Student Rights Charter
• ESU Statement on Artificial Intelligence

The post Fundamental Values and Solidarity Policy Paper appeared first on European Students' Union.

Preamble

We, the students of Europe, hold these universal rights to be unconcealed, self-evident and inalienable.

We believe that education is a human right, not a privilege and indispensable for the advancement of other human rights, that students are equal partners in education, and that education has a societal, personal, cultural and economic objective as well as a purpose in and of itself. Every student is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Charter, free from any form of discrimination, including, but not limited to discrimination on the basis of political conviction, religion, race, ethnic or cultural origin, gender, sexual orientation, age, socio-economic standing, health (physical and mental), language or any disability they may have. Every student is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Charter without regard to their field, mode or level of study or methods of programme delivery.

The rights laid down in this Charter stem from the fundamental human right to education. These rights apply for all domains and ought to be implemented at all levels of student involvement within Higher Education with decision and policy-making powers: sub-institutional, institutional, regional, national, transnational and international, including within alliances of Higher Education Institutions.

In this document, “students” refers to all those enrolled in Higher Education, and “access” in Higher Education refers to both physical and digital access that should be guaranteed independently of each other.

§ 1 – Social Dimension of Higher Education

1. Everyone has the right to access, progress and complete free, quality Higher Education.
2. All students have the right to full and equal participation in Higher Education, free from discrimination.
3. All students have the right to equal and free usage of Higher Education facilities and services.
4. All students have the right to conduct their studies with sufficient public financial support in the form of a grant.
5. Everyone has the right to inclusive and diverse admission to any Higher Education institution without any barriers, such as financial or bureaucratic restrictions.
6. All students have the right to affordable quality and suitable housing.
7. All students have the right to affordable, nutritious and sustainable food in  consideration of their dietary requirements.
8. All students have the right to access free and good quality living necessities (including but not limited to technical equipment and support for studies and essential goods such as hygiene products).
9. All students have the right to free and adequate mechanisms in place to support their physical and mental wellbeing.
10. All students have the right to free issuance of study certificates and documents and those confirming their student status.
11. All students have the right to have access to quality healthcare and psychological counselling timely and free of charge.
12. All students have the right to physically and digitally access Higher Education and social spaces regardless of physical and mental disposition and any disability they may have.
13. All students have the right to have their physical and/or mental disabilities taken into account and to receive all necessary support when attending classes or being assessed. Additionally, the infrastructure of Higher Education Institutions and all its bodies should be adapted to the specific needs of students with disabilities.
14. All students have the right to have study material, assignments, and exams adjusted to their accessibility requirements.
15. All students have the right to free access to all relevant educational resources, in both physical and open data digital formats.
16. All students have the right to attend social, cultural and recreational events, void of any barriers.
17. All students have the right to equal participation in Higher Education that does not interfere with their religious practices (including but not limited to lecture, seminar and exam timetabling).
18. All students with refugee and minority backgrounds have the right to full access, academic inclusion, equitable treatment, support services, opportunities for advancement, participation and completion of Higher Education.
19. Students speaking a minoritised native language should be able to participate in Higher Education in their native language.
20. All students have the right to self-express as an individual or as a group void of administrative and/or bureaucratic barriers, censorship or discrimination.
21. All students have the right to participate in Higher Education spaces with institutional staff who have undergone necessary training pertaining to non-discrimination and mental health wellbeing.
22. All students have the right to a free and fair appeal to an independent representative body against any act which they consider to be discriminatory.
23. All students have the right to independent and impartial advice regarding their access and participation in Higher Education through institutional, regional and/or national Student Ombud or similar solutions.
24. All students have access to free and, where possible sustainable transport methods, regardless of their age. 
25. Every student has the right to receive the study grants or the scholarships for which they have applied and for which has been deemed entitled to, even when the allocation of additional government funding for higher education is required.
26. Every student has the right to freely change their field of study, without the fear of repercussions in their academic path, such as additional financial burdens.

§ 2 – Academic Freedom, Institutional Autonomy, Public Responsibility and Academic Integrity 

1. Public authorities have the responsibility to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to benefit from quality education free of charge.
2. All students have the right to study at public Higher Education Institutions that are fully core funded.
3. All students have the right to Higher Education free of commodification and independent from the labour market.
4. All students have the right to structural support to begin, progress through and complete their educational programme.
5. All students have the right to protection of their academic freedom, student’s rights and academic integrity.
6. All students have the right to freely access specialised softwares for detecting plagiarism.
7. All students have the right to express their thoughts about their Higher Education process, Higher Education Institutions or any matter of students` interest, including the freedom to assemble and protest, without fear of persecution.
8. All students have the right to partake autonomously and meaningfully as full and equal members with all responsibilities and privileges, in Higher Education governing structures, decision making, implementation, and assessment processes for learning, teaching and research as well as for support services. Students should make up at least an equal amount compared to, academic, administrative and technical staff in all decision-making and relevant administrative bodies.
9. All students have the right to pursue their research, teaching, and learning autonomously and use their Higher Education Institutions facilities accordingly.
10. All students have the right to the protection of their intellectual property and the recognition of their intellectual contribution. 
11. All students have the right to free access to relevant information and sources in accordance with the stipulations laid out by the Open Science Movement.
12. All students have the right to transparent Higher Education and study programs, both in the national and international context.
13. All students have the right to the proper protection of their personal data and information.
14. All HEI administration processes should be transparent and all students have the right to understand how Higher Education Institutions and public authorities use automatic or technology assisted processes (including but not limited to AI) to make decisions and impact their learning processes.
15. All students have the right to discrimination and bias free education, including  the deployment of AI and digital tools in education embedded in a human rights approach, following principles of proportionality of the usage of such tools vis-à-vis students’ privacy, IT-security, anti-discriminatory and other fundamental  rights.
16. All students have the right to lifelong learning being included as a paradigm in their Higher Education according to the whole education approach.
17. All students have the right to a healthy living, studying and working environment supporting physical and mental wellbeing.
18. All students have the right to mobilise peacefully regarding issues inside or outside of academic institutions without fear of any form of repercussions pertaining to their education.
19. All students have the right to a higher education environment that safeguards and promotes common and democratic values, active citizenship, personal development, tolerance and a sense of civic responsibility especially under consideration of the socially and ecologically just transition of society.
20. All students have the right to fair assessment and attendance policies that take into account individual and unforeseen circumstances.
21. In case of infringement of their rights, all students have the right to access processes of remedy, which are to operate in reasonable time through independent and impartial structures.

§ 3 – Internationalisation and Mobility

1. All students have the right to partake in a physical mobility period regardless of their disability, socio-economic background or their academic situation.
2. All students have the right to full funding of their international mobility period, covering all related costs of study, living and travel, and to be informed about mobility grants.
3. All students have the right to have one’s cultural background recognised and respected.
4. All students have the right to move freely outside of their host higher education institution.
5. All students have the right to gain intercultural competencies as part of their education during their course of studies.
6. All students have the right to a fair, costless, easy, non-bureaucratic and timely assessment and recognition process of the learning outcomes, including from non-formal and informal learning, obtained in another country. This should be available for both continuing education and entering the labour market. 
7. All students have the right to quality, internationalised higher education, including but not limited to through virtual cooperation and internationalisation-at-home opportunities.
8. International and mobile students have the right to participate in student representation and student activities to the same extent as local students.
9. All students have the right to participate in all of the activities, local, national and international, at the Higher Education Institution they are attending abroad, and to be supported in their integration into the local and academic community.
10. International Students have the right to organise autonomously and represent themselves and receive sufficient support for these objectives.
11. Democratic student organisations have the right to collaborate with their counterparts in other campuses, countries, and continents.

§ 4 – Quality Education

1. All students have the right to be evaluated or graded solely on their academic performance as part of their academic programme.
2. All students have the right to learning, teaching, assessment and internship environments that support and encourage the development of student-centred, autonomous learning. This also includes the development of transversal skills such as critical and creative thinking.
3. All students have the right to receive constructive feedback on their academic activities and performance.
4. Students have the right to be active partners in both the internal and external quality assurance systems at all levels, ensuring their inclusion and meaningful involvement alongside national and international QA agencies, Higher Education Institutions and other relevant stakeholders.
5. All students have the right to participate, as equal partners, in the continuous assessment and improvement of their study programmes and institutions.
6. All students have the right to a flexible and customisable study program, as well as the required support services in place to progress in the study program, including academic and career counselling.
7. All students have the right to diverse, interactive and qualitative teaching and evaluation methods aligned with their learning objectives.
8. All students have a right to be critically educated in artificial intelligence (AI) and data literacy, keeping in mind both the limitations and possibilities of AI in education and research.
9. All students have the right to have access to quality, adequately paid and compensated curricular and extracurricular traineeships and internships without any type of discrimination. These traineeship and internship opportunities must also provide all students with a safe work environment.
10. All students have the right to continuously reviewed, assessed, updated and developed programmes, ensuring that all types of education provision, including microcredentials, digital badges etc comply with the same standards of quality, accessibility and student-centredness.
11. All students have the right to free access to comprehensive and objective information on the quality of the programme and institution in which they wish to study or are already studying.
12. All students have the right to transparent and well-communicated quality assurance processes that lead to significant follow-up and ensure meaningful student participation at all levels.
13. All students have the right to quality didactic and pedagogical teaching. This must be ensured by continuous professional development of academic staff.
14. All students have the right to assess and give feedback on the quality of teaching they receive, through course feedback questionnaires, and participation in quality assurance procedures and other in decision making and relevant administrative bodies.
15. All students have the right to fair recognition of qualifications as well as automatic recognition of qualifications and learning periods abroad in the European Higher Education Area.
16. All students have the right to fair and free recognition of their academic work.
17. All students have the right to free and timely access to their academic situation and to the release of their diplomas and other documents regarding their status.
18. All students have the right to have the grading of their academic work re-evaluated by an external examiner.
19. All students have the right to a free and fair appeal against any decision related to their studies to an independent body.
20. All students have the right to critical human oversight in situations where technology assisted decision making is being used. All students have the right to access what information and technology tools are being used in making such decisions.
21. All students have the right to gain practical knowledge directly related to the labour market; this includes the right to vocational counselling.
22. All students have the right to quality extracurricular opportunities that allow for learning beyond the confines of the curriculum.
23. All students have the right to recognition and valorisation of their prior non-formal and informal learning, for both access in and progress through higher education. Students must have adequate guidance for the recognition process. The validated learning outcomes should also be included in the Diploma Supplement.
24. All students have the right to access appropriate educational opportunities to support their continued learning and development, regardless of their current academic performance.
25. All students have the right to modern, up-to-date and accessible academic infrastructures, whether physical or digital, including all those facilities belonging to internship and traineeship partners, linked to the requirements of the study programme, including free subscription and unconditional access to quality digital instruments such as softwares, hardware components and AI tools.

§ 5 – Student participation and representation in higher education governance

General

1. All students have the right to organise autonomously.
2. All students have the right (directly or through democratic representation) to co-governance in all decision preparatory commissions and decision-making bodies relevant to their student life. Students must have at least the same power and representation in these decision-making bodies as the academic, administrative and technical staff of the higher education community. Students must not suffer academic, financial or politically motivated legal consequences stemming from such involvement.
3. All students have the right to transparent access to the regulations, resolutions, decisions, minutes, and other institutional documents of their higher education institution.

2. All students have the right to run and be elected as student’s representatives in open, free and fair elections and without discrimination. They have the right to participate in the work, policy-making, and decision-making process of different Higher Education institutions or other relevant stakeholders in Higher Education. Student representatives should be elected, replaced, and dismissed only by students.
3. The right to be active as a student representative must not be restricted or made subject to conditions based on other factors (such as academic performance or attendance policies).
4. All students have the right to have their opinion considered as that of all stakeholders on equal footing in Higher Education, following the principles of partnership and collegiality.
5. All students and student organisations have the right to freely express themselves, not limited to academic matters.
6. Students have the right to be informed about all Higher Education affairs in a transparent and timely manner.
7. All students have the right to be represented by themselves through democratically elected representatives at all levels of governance. All students of a higher education institution have the right to form a students’ union both at institutional and sub-institutional level. All students have the right to be meaningfully represented via democratically elected student representatives in regional, national, transnational and international umbrella unions.
8. All students should be able to freely exercise their right to vote even when they are away from their municipality of residence without being forced to face financial burdens or having to travel back to their electoral district, in all elections, including European, national, local ones and referenda.

Student Unions

1. Student unions have the right to political independence, to financial autonomy and to manage and administer their own affairs.
2. All organisations representing students have the right to be recognised, financially supported, and be provided dedicated spaces by their Higher Education Institutions.
3. Student unions have the right
   • To represent and safeguard the professional, political, economic, social, ecological and cultural interests of its members, taking into account the special interests of students belonging to minorities and marginalised groups.
   • To promote common and democratic values, active citizenship, personal development, political education, tolerance and a sense of civic responsibility especially under consideration of the socially and ecologically just transition of society.
   • To maintain sub-institutional, institutional, regional, national, transnational and international relations, including the formation of and membership in umbrella organisations.
   • To be duly consulted on issues concerning the governance and further development of higher education institutions and/or the relevant higher education system.
   • To represent and safeguard the interests of its members (directly or through democratic representation) on regional, national, transnational, European and international governance levels.

The post Student Rights Charter appeared first on European Students' Union.

I. INTRODUCTION

1.1 General remarks about the concept of social dimension in higher education

Making higher education accessible to all has been an everlasting hallmark of student activism and higher education policy. A higher education system which is not accessible multiplies inequalities, instead of reducing them. Lack of access to an inclusive higher education hinders access to prosperity for the individual, but equally to the community and society as a whole, thus ingraining their scope in a wider movement of social justice. 

In a world of complexity, challenges that require advanced skills and transitions, higher education gives crucial empowerment and agency for those who pursue it. For students already in higher education, supportive policies are essential to ensure progress and completion of studies, and their absence turns into higher chances of dropout, mental health issues, dissatisfaction with their studies and possibly lost potential. 

Social dimension policies, understood transversally and holistically, are the set of systems and measures in place to ensure everyone can benefit from higher education in an equitable manner. Starting with practices to ensure there are no formal barriers of entry, social dimension developed into a consistent concept of policies that cover access, progress, and completion through the lens of diversity, equity and inclusion and encompassing, apart from specific and proactive inclusivity policies, connections to matters pertaining to funding, institutional strategies, wellbeing policies and so on. 

Designing and implementing social dimension policies at national and institutional level, as well as the interest of decision-makers, varies greatly between countries. While usually fairly similar in approach, they are adapted to national and local contexts based on particularities, funding models or historical reasons. Despite having different degrees of success, a truly equitable and inclusive access to quality education is an objective still to be reached everywhere in Europe.  

1.2 Social dimension and international developments

At international level, stemming from the commitment to (higher) education as a human right, countries have expressed several objectives to make higher education more inclusive, but these commitments are seldomly monitored and enforced in a consistent manner. According to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, higher education should be made accessible to all, ‘in particular by the progressive introduction of free education’. Furthermore, the United Nations’ Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights remarks that enforcing higher education as a human right requires availability, accessibility, acceptability, and adaptability, all linked to inclusive higher education systems. 

The most relevant developments related to the cooperation on social dimension policies came from the Bologna Process/European Higher Education Area, albeit at a later stage in comparison with other policy initiatives and mainly as a result of ESU’s advocacy. 

Understanding that a truly European higher education area cannot be fostered without putting students and their condition at the centre, in the London Communique the ministers committed themselves to social dimension as ‘the societal aspiration that the student body entering, participating in and completing higher education at all levels should reflect the diversity of our populations’[1]. This, however, remains an aspiration that is still very far from being achieved. In the Leuven Communique, countries agreed to ‘set measurable targets for widening overall participation and increasing participation of underrepresented groups in higher education to be reached by the end of the next decade’, while adopting an EHEA Strategy on equity and growth in 2015 through the Yerevan Communique. 

Despite several high level commitments and decades of expectations from students, results in many national and international studies show that inequity based on socio-economic status, parental education, gender, country-of-origin, rural background and other factors remains an unacceptable reality in our Higher Education systems, with parental higher education background and income levels still the most accurate predictors of a higher education degree While improvement has been shown, analysis of this improvement over the last 40 years shows that that it could take over 100 years for disadvantaged groups to catch up with their more advantaged peers, should the current rate of improvement be maintained.[2]

In recent years, the Bologna Process went further from simply stating the objective to promote social dimension to agreeing on more detailed policy means and commitments. In the 2020 Rome Communique, an ‘inclusive EHEA’ has been agreed as one of the three overarching objectives to be achieved by 2030, with the first step being the agreement on the first comprehensive set of actions to be taken up, through the Principles and Guidelines to Strengthen the Social Dimension of higher education in the European Higher Education Area (‘PAGs). 

The PAGs take forward the previous work within the EHEA and add to the definition of social dimension coined through the London Communique that social dimension encompasses a desired inclusive environment that fosters equity, diversity and is responsive to the needs of the local communities.

The PAGs are meant to set a foundation that ensures quality higher education is universally accessible, while guidelines have the role to interpret the principles and support their operationalisation in practice, with the public authorities (especially ministries of higher education) called to make sure that the agreed-upon shared ideas are effectively implemented in all EHEA countries. The PAGs are centred around 10 tenets: strategies on social dimension, flexibility, lifelong learning, data, guidance and counselling, funding, staff training and institutional mission, mobility, community engagement and policy dialogue.

While the adoption of the PAGs coincided with the most difficult times of the Covid-19 pandemic, the inadequate response or even the lack of any response to properly support students in the aftermath of the pandemic, and even more during the cost of living crisis exacerbated by the energy crises and inflation, driven by the Russian aggression in Ukraine, show that there is still a lot to work on to ensure that the PAGs are fully internalised and transposed into meaningful action at national and institutional levels. 

1.3 The concept of Social dimension from ESU’s perspective

From students’ perspective, social dimension policies should ensure that higher education is accessible and inclusive, allowing for completion of higher education by all individuals, regardless of their status or background. ESU strongly believes that access to higher education is not only a human right but is also fundamental to the functioning of a society.

To ensure that higher education reflects the diversity of society, governmental action entails more than widening accessibility clauses, but rather to steer away from the one size fits all approach and to put emphasis on systems that are able to offer tailored individual support, in an intersectional way, to foster a diverse student population.

While higher education should be free and all students should benefit from universal benefits in order to support access to and completion of higher education, category-based policies for disadvantaged, vulnerable and underrepresented groups should be in place as well. The measures should span from before entry in higher education to after graduation and include both financial and non-financial support, as well as guidance, information, and counselling. Social dimension should move from a paradigm of ‘lack of barriers’ to one of ‘guaranteeing opportunities’, by fostering proactive measures at national, institutional and sub institutional levels. Social dimension must commit both to a horizontal coherent set of policies (such as funding, counselling, or promoting health and wellbeing) and touch upon and reinforce with other policy goals and tools, increasing synergies and ensuring best results. This pursuit requires seeing learning and teaching policies, research policies or measures to promote quality of education through a social dimension lens, as such promoting access and quality simultaneously. Furthermore, no successful social dimension overarching strategy can be implemented without sufficient funding: while governments can praise the importance of promoting the inclusivity of higher education, their commitment is commensurate also to the degree to which public resources are directed to this goal.  

The value of non-discrimination is part and parcel of this process and is a cornerstone towards achieving comprehensive diversity within the system. Non-discrimination is not the end-goal, however, as mere tolerance should be superseded by a climate of inclusion, mutual care, safety, and diversity, with an intersectional and conscious approach taken with all issues.

At the same time, it needs to be understood that the so-called majority or minority groups are not necessarily actual groups (i.e. fixed entities with identifiable members). The term ‘groups’ simply signifies dominant categories that are in play in society and that describes ideas allotted to individual people who are believed to fit such labels.[3] It is therefore imperative to walk the fine line between falsely believing that individuals defined into a group all have the same needs and interests, or similarly falsely believing that since individual differences always exist and matter, including voices of people from marginalised groups is futile, unnecessary or impractical. Walking this line, we can move towards creating spaces and institutions which allow all individuals to flourish, and to realise their potential to the fullest.

In a nutshell, ensuring access requires proactive measures by states, considerations of policy areas not commonly thought of as related to Higher Education, cultural shifts and shifts in understanding in many fields, and a true commitment by all stakeholders to focus on the Social Dimension as a key priority in the field of Higher Education. 

In the next sections of this policy paper, after presenting the wider benefits of education which urge the need to speed up the development of social dimension policies, we will present in more detail each of the components of students’ understanding of what social dimension policies comprise of and how each contributes to achieving the end goal. 

II. THE HOLISTIC ROLE OF HIGHER EDUCATION

Higher Education is a firmly established fundamental institution and part of our society, as well as one of the most important mechanisms to steer our way through social, cultural, and economic changes in our societies. It is key to ensuring a prosperous, stable and inclusive society, which makes decisions based on science-based evidence. However, this crucial role is put into jeopardy when higher education is not equally accessible or reflective of the diversity of the society, thus remaining a privilege of those with advantaged backgrounds.

Higher levels of education promote higher social inclusion [4], while also enabling citizens to better understand and make use of their rights, increasing their social, political, and economical participation. As studies [5] show, people with higher education are more inclined to vote and to take part in public affairs, and in turn higher education should better equip them with active citizenship skills. Ensuring that every person within our society has the opportunity to further their education is not only fundamental to eradicating historically entrenched social inequalities, but also adds value in strengthening democratic societies and sustainable economies.

Having a higher education degree also increases one’s life standards and consciousness of health prevention, as evidenced by the increased life expectancy for higher education graduates[6]. While pursuing an academic degree can create mental health issues, especially if adequate measures are not put in place by governments and higher education institutions, higher education graduates report increased wellbeing and can generally cope better with mental health issues[7]. All of this can be partly explained also by higher individual incomes associated with pursuing higher education.[8] 

The benefits of higher education are spread widely also by securing diversity within the academic and administrative staff employed in Higher Education Institutions. They should also mirror the diversity in society. This is not only important for enhancing the quality of education and legitimacy of higher education as an institution, but also to ensure a welcoming, comfortable, and inclusive environment for diverse groups of students entering higher education. 

The relevant body of research therefore suggests that making higher education fully accessible and free to everyone, beyond representing a universal human right, wields extremely positive outcomes beyond individuals, by representing the best investment in society. Collectively, these wider benefits sustain cohesive, democratic societies where social justice, public good and social mobility prevail.

III. STRATEGIES ON SOCIAL DIMENSION

3.1 Strategies on social dimension in national context

In order to create comprehensive, efficient and exhaustive policies that promote access to quality higher education for all, governments should enact strategies containing policy goals as well as qualitative and quantitative targets on social dimension, as well as regular action plans with concrete timeframes to put them in practice. These strategies and action plans should have sufficient legislative power and legitimacy, as well as accountability measures attached to their implementation. 

The whole policy cycle should be marked by a co-creation with stakeholders, especially student unions and students from disadvantaged, vulnerable and underrepresented groups. Given that people from marginalised backgrounds and conditions are often disregarded or lack power, a consistent culture of inclusion has to exist in policy-making. They should be empowered and treated as equal partners from the agenda setting and policy formulation to decision-making, implementation, monitoring, evaluation, and review. 

The strategies and action plans should have dedicated bodies for oversight and implementation, clear division of responsibilities between various structures responsible for the social dimension of higher education, including other sectors of government, as well as adequate, consistent, and dedicated funding to ensure reaching the desired goals. 

The promotion of social dimension through governmental policies should include both universal and need-based policies for all students, as well as tailored policies for identified disadvantaged, vulnerable, or underrepresented groups. These policies should be created in a lifelong learning approach and agreement should be pursued with all the relevant decision-makers. As the student life is not impacted exclusively by educational policies, and other circumstances equally impact student living and success, cooperation should be achieved with authorities in charge of finance, employment, health and social welfare, housing, migration and so on. 

In order to make best use of the national architecture and frameworks for higher education, the strategies and action plans should divide responsibilities between different levels of public authorities, horizontally and vertically (national, local public authorities and if applicable regional authorities), as well as between public authorities and higher education institutions. 

The division of responsibilities between public authorities and higher education institutions should be based on national context and agreed between them, together with stakeholders. When responsibilities for promoting the social dimension of higher education falls under the competence of higher education institutions, public authorities should provide funding and find an adequate balance between regulation and incentives. 

Irrespective of the agreed model of shared responsibilities, students should have a legally recognised and enforceable right to inclusive higher education systems and higher education institutions should foster this by their irreplaceable role, as the institutions closest to student life.

Higher education institutions should have in place their own institutional strategies on social dimensions, and the same principles outlined above on their life-cycle and student co-creation should apply. These strategies should go beyond measures related to social dimension seen in a silo and integrate these principles into the core higher education missions: learning and teaching, research, innovation, knowledge circulation and outreach, institutional governance, and management. 

3.2 Strategies on social dimension in international context 

European cooperation for enhancing the social dimension of higher education is essential and its role has grown over the time. Under the European scope of cooperation lies the importance of sharing best practices, as well as agreeing on common goals. As European higher education systems become increasingly interconnected, it is even more relevant to guarantee that a student pursuing a degree in any European country benefits from a set of minimum protections. For ESU, this set of universal rights are enshrined in our Student Rights’ Charter and a dedicated chapter focuses on social dimension. 

We are appreciating positively the development under way in the Bologna Process and the momentum given to promoting an inclusive EHEA. While EHEA is currently the fora where social dimension is put at the forefront the most, making an inclusive EHEA a reality for all students is still far from sight. Also generally outlined in our statement on the future of the Bologna Process from BM84, ESU believes that after the ministers will have agreed on indicators for the implementation of the Principles and Guidelines on Social Dimension, a robust monitoring and peer-support system should be put in place. Furthermore, the work in Bologna on social dimension could be pursued with objectives such as supporting evidence-based impact assessment of social dimension policies and fostering links with other policy areas. 

Simultaneous developments are taking place in the European Education Area, which the European Union aims to achieve by 2025. One of the actions dedicated towards the creation of EEA is the adoption of an inclusivity framework. 

ESU strongly underlines that a European Education Area cannot be achieved without having inclusivity at heart. In this sense, ESU considers that the EU’s role is to support and enhance the implementation of the already agreed upon Principles and Guidelines on Social Dimension, not to create parallel structures. In this sense, three measures stand out: the creation of synergies of funding streams between various EU resources (Erasmus+, Cohesion funds, National Recovery and Resilience Plans etc) in order to support the social dimension of higher education, its infrastructure and students, setting up and promoting the achievement of concrete targets on social dimension, and promoting tools to ensure that EU initiatives within the EEA are themselves inclusive, including inclusive mobility through funds for Erasmus+ that sufficiently cover the need for adequate grants to support the participation of all students, irrespective of the background, in physical mobility opportunities. To assess progress, the proposed Higher Education Observatory should monitor social dimension policies and the student social condition together with stakeholders. 

Several initiatives are being rolled out at the level of EEA, especially the creation of European University Alliances. ESU believes that the inclusivity framework should include specific measures in place to support the inclusivity of Alliances, so that all students can take part in their activities. Apart from the topic of access to mobility, this entails making sure that the proposed European degrees do not create two tier systems that transform the European degrees in elitist study programmes. Among the areas which are taken into account in relation to setting up European degrees, ESU believes that the component of social dimension is severely understated. If European degrees are to be created, this will require common admission systems and student support systems that are open to all students. The funding models should not allow for European degrees where higher fees are introduced, or students are not eligible for the same level of financial assistance.  

All these elements should be encompassed in a revision of the 2012 Council Conclusions on social dimension, including a minimum set of investments for student support services that could take the form of a Council Recommendation.

IV. SOCIAL DIMENSION AS A TRANSVERSAL POLICY GOAL 

The Social Dimension of Higher Education needs to be seen by all stakeholders as a core value and priority in the policy area of Higher Education. Prioritising the Social Dimension is an essential step in creating the kind of society that we students strive for: a society that is equal, intelligent, diverse, safe, prosperous, and sustainable.

While social dimension should apply transversally across higher education architecture, organisation, regulation, and policy, it should itself be broad and offer an intersectional understanding of access. In order to achieve free education for all students, it is not enough to abolish tuition fees, if a lack of available housing, or high rental costs mean that those from disadvantaged backgrounds will be forced to work throughout their studies while not being able to have enough time for study, drop out or avoid HE altogether. Policy making in a way that focuses on access is undoubtedly more difficult and burdensome than the alternative of using one-size-fits-all measures, but it is essential if we wish to stop excluding people from facets of society meant for everyone. 

4.1 Social dimension in recognition

Recognition is a gateway for further studies and access to the labour market. As such, a recognition system which is not inclusive can pose additional barriers to already disadvantaged students. ESU believes that simple, flexible, effective, non-discriminatory and affordable recognition procedures should be in place, as barriers encountered in seeking recognition disincentivize potential students from entering Higher Education. This can also happen when the permeability within flexible learning pathways, including with professional and Vocational education and training (VET) higher education, is not fully in place. It is very important that there is constant communication and collaboration between higher education institutions, national authorities, recognition agencies, student representatives and other stakeholders in order to create more suitable conditions for students. Furthermore, international students can be in a precarious position while seeking recognition in another country, and as such inclusive information provision in multiple languages should be promoted. 

Improving recognition procedures is also of crucial importance for including refugees, displaced persons, and people in refugee-like situations in Higher Education. Barriers to providing proof of learning are often encountered if documentary evidence is incoherent or not in hand. Efficient and fair procedures should be in place to comprehensively assess whether these learners fulfil the relevant requirements to access higher education, in accordance with article VII of the Lisbon Recognition Convention. Information provision is equally important, while currently only 55% of national authorities publish information related to the recognition of qualifications for refugees, according to the LRC Monitoring Report. Furthermore, national authorities should deploy more digital solutions and databases to support the smooth recognition procedure while using qualifications frameworks with flexibility. 

ESU supports the involvement of all the countries within the EHEA in the application of the European Qualifications Passport for Refugees [9]. On this line, it is important to recognise the value of self-assessment, as well as to provide individual counselling, allowing the individual to take ownership of the process. It is also important to promote initiatives to facilitate refugees’ access to higher education, working with higher education institutions and governments, granting scholarships to refugee and asylum-seeking students with the adhesion of more European countries to the experience of U4Refugees [10] programme, in partnership with UNHCR.

4.2 Students’ employment

Students must be able to sustain decent living standards and afford their studies without having to work alongside their full-time programme, as full-time studies are by definition full-time and therefore no employment should be required to sustain them. Similarly, part-time studies should not lead to an ineligibility for financial support, as the potentially related part-time work does not necessarily translate in a financial capacity to sustain studies, and part-time students can also have different responsibilities or disabilities that prevent them from working.

Student employment can raise concerns about the impact on academic achievement due to reduced time available for studies, and the impact on the quality of the student’s educational experience, stress levels and mental health and overall completion rates[11]. 

Financial barriers faced by students through both direct and indirect costs of HE should be removed through social support systems. However, should some students wish to work alongside their studies, particularly if it has a positive impact on their academic achievement or personal development, they should have the flexibility to deal with the disadvantages which they are going to face in the given position. In need-based social support systems for students, laws and practices should be in place to avoid either discouraging students from working in cases when they wish to work (e.g. systems where even minor income from work leads to distinctively lower social benefits) or creating distinctive incentives for students to work during their studies (e.g. systems where working students gain special benefits, either directly or indirectly).

Nevertheless, when students are part of the labour force through student jobs and workplace learning, they should have the same rights as any other employee and student jobs should be aligned with basic labour rights standards, considering students’ special status as young individuals that can lead to discrimination as well as exploitation. Workplace learning, especially with regard to internships, has a learning and a working element. Employees need to ensure that the learning element follows the quality standards and learning outcomes of higher education, while the students’ rights in workplace learning need to be aligned with the rights of employees, including the ban of unpaid internships and/or proper compensation as well as other labour related issues. Furthermore, higher education institutions should support students in being admitted to internships. When internships are a part of the curriculum, public authorities should have the responsibility to make sure all expenses that occur in relation to the internship are covered. 

In addition, it is important that higher education institutions strive to ensure that these compulsory internships offer a concrete opportunity for students to learn new skills and do not result in hours of unvaluable work. Higher education institutions should commit to offering quality internship opportunities and each student must be given the opportunity to choose which internship to undertake and should not be constrained to face a forced choice on the part of the higher education institution. 

4.3 Lifelong learning

A higher level of education in our entire societies is the prerequisite for social progress. Thus, lifelong learning opportunities should be accessible to anyone at any point in their life, no matter their economic background. Lifelong learning is also a way to adapt to the changing needs of society and help individuals improve their personal quality of life. Lifelong learning incorporates any formal, informal, and non-formal learning processes that can serve as tools in enabling individuals to achieve their personal and professional ambitions, regardless of one’s social status. Lifelong learning is an important factor of upward social mobility, and functions to reduce social inequality across all of society while enhancing the society’s knowledge base and skills. Lifelong learning should be integrated in national educational plans, as it is a part of a comprehensive educational policy which covers all students at all times. Though its usefulness in honing professional skills should not be understated, lifelong learning is still primarily an educational responsibility and should not fall under the primary purview of labour planning and policies.

As employment habits are prone to rather rapid changes and, in tandem, changes in society emphasise the importance of personal development as a continuous process, HE systems should promote lifelong learning as a means to achieving universal access and dynamic learning environments. Flexible learning paths and the recognition of prior learning are indispensable tools in the proper function of lifelong learning. Lifelong learning can also promote learning about democratic and social values across all of society.

While lifelong learning is important, it’s just as important that the possibility of lifelong learning doesn’t become an excuse to downplay the importance and funding of education earlier in life. It’s still very important to ensure both the education of young people who want to enter higher education institutions and also offering the possibility to go back to education later in life.

Furthermore, there should also be an interdependence between the higher education sector and their wider social communities through open dialogue and community engagement from higher education institutions that allow societal partners to support new learning pathways for the wider community to participate in higher education systems.

One of the tools that are currently being promoted as a means to upskilling and reskilling through lifelong learning are microcredentials. However, as an OECD paper [12] observes, microcredentials will not support social dimension and inclusion of diverse students in higher education if this policy goal is not accompanied by concrete measures. On the contrary, microcredentials can lead to further inequality especially in the case where they lead to commodification through increased tuition fees or when the student support systems are not accessible to learners enrolled in microcredentials. It is important to ensure that microcredentials do not become a fee-based degree or a new fee-based entry pathway to higher education.

4.4 An inclusive learning environment

A safe learning environment free from discrimination for all enables everyone, but especially marginalised groups to act and research freely and ensures academic freedom. The learning environment plays a crucial role in quality education. Students need accessible physical and digital infrastructure. The learning environment includes, but is not limited to buildings, virtual learning environments and digital tools. The learning environment must be safe, accessible, sustainable and of good quality. There should be accessible and gender-neutral toilets available. The learning environment should be based on the principles of universal design in order to be as inclusive as possible. Where universal design is not sufficient, individual adaptations must be made to remove barriers for students who require them. Students should not have to prove their disabilities with formal diagnosis and should only have to submit their request for adaptations once. 

There must be designated rooms on campus that are quiet rooms available for rest and retreat from stimuli. 

Many students are forced into choosing a gender that does not match their identity. When enrolling and in higher education systems there must be several options for gender, this must be easy for students themselves to change whenever necessary.  This allows for them to feel included and helps avoid discrimination and misgendering. Additionally higher education information systems, where legally possible, must provide options for students to choose and change their name and pronouns used on their student identity card, learning platforms and internal communication such as e-mail address freely.

To ensure safety for all students there must be anti-discrimination, anti-harassment and gender-based violence policies in place. The whole higher education community must be aware of these policies, receive training and follow them. All higher education institutions must have reporting systems for unacceptable behaviour or undesirable conditions in the learning environment. There must be clear procedures for reporting and disciplinary measures, both online and in- person. It must be possible to report both anonymously and confidentially. 

There needs to be training to ensure staff and students recognise harassment and discrimination. Staff need to be trained to support students. There must be a victim centred approach to resolution of reports and the safety of the victim(s). Reports must be handled in a timely manner with a clearly communicated timeline, and sanctions should be proportionate, whilst focusing on prevention. Reporting should be handled by an independent third party such as an independent counselling centre, which can be financed by the higher education institution and operates irrespective of the higher education institution by offering free services by qualified and serves as a contact point for students encountering discrimination and harassment. Data on the number and nature of reports, must be made available for quality assurance and transparency. This will allow for targeted approaches to improving the learning environment Students must be insured while they are on campus and taking part in any activities related to their course.

4.5 Social dimension in quality assurance processes

ESU believes that quality assurance processes are an important tool for supporting social dimension policies in higher education. Analysis[13] from ESU suggests that several national systems already integrate elements related to social dimension in their criteria: this can happen either through distinct criteria on social dimension or transversally in criteria linked to learning and teaching or institutional management. According to the results from various stakeholders, areas such as ‘increasing completion rates’, ‘access for students with disabilities’, ‘psychological counselling and wellbeing’ and ‘antidiscrimination policies’ are part of most quality assurance systems, while other policies, such as ‘institutional strategy on social dimension’, ‘monitoring concrete targets on social dimension’ and ‘data collection of social dimension’ having a lower take up.

While different systems can put attributes related to monitoring or enhancing social dimension policies to different public bodies, we believe that quality assurance has a key role to play. This follows different logics: one of appropriateness – quality assurance, based on its procedures, is fit to monitor social dimension, one of normativity – inclusive higher education is part of the political vision of a quality higher education, and one of consequences – the results of using quality assurance for promoting social dimension can yield positive benefits. 

The Standards and Guidelines on Quality Assurance in EHEA, one of the most successful initiatives of European cooperation in higher education, already include elements related to social dimension. Nevertheless, ESU strongly supports expanding its coverage. At national level, all stakeholders should be engaged in agreeing on which indicators related to social dimension are most relevant to be included in national quality assurance frameworks, based on priorities and context. 

Finally, the quality assurance processes should be themselves inclusive, supporting the participation of disadvantaged, vulnerable and underrepresented students in student representation and experts as part of expert panels. 

V. FLEXIBLE LEARNING PATHWAYS AND STUDY OFFER

Study programmes should be designed to be responsive to the diverse needs of students that have to reconcile studying with other commitments, such as work, family life, student representation or being a caregiver. Besides the need for flexible forms of programme delivery, teaching methods should also be sensitive to and accommodate the diverse learning styles of mature students and students with diverse backgrounds such as through recognition and utilisation of their prior experience and use of multidisciplinary approaches to learning. Designing flexible learning paths to enable people to enter or return to higher education without the need to interrupt their personal, professional, or social pathways or student representative mandate is beneficial to their career progress and self-development, and a key factor in facilitating broader upward social mobility. 

5.1 Admission systems 

The admission system at higher education institutions should contribute to greater social mobility and should not solely be based on grade average, entrance exams, motivation letters and standardised testing, which can be in favour of students from more privileged socio-economic backgrounds. ESU calls for higher education institutions to use more diverse methods of admissions that cater for people from diverse educational backgrounds. The admissions procedures should themselves be inclusive of the needs of various students, such as those with disabilities, low socio-economic backgrounds, and free of costs for every student.

In a pursuit of the freedom to learn, the number of admission places should be increased regionally and nationally in alignment with adequate funding and a commitment to providing quality education. While capacity requirements which limit the number of admission places through regulatory frameworks can be in place in order to ensure the quality of education (such as staff ratios), the governments should invest in increasing the capacity and infrastructure to ensure that all those who desire to pursue a higher education degree, irrespective of the study field, can do so. 

Jointly with these admissions procedures, orientation and re-orientation processes should be present in the processes of admission to higher education. These procedures help students evaluate their strengths, weaknesses and interests so they can freely choose their preferred field of study and allow students to get support if they wish to change their field of study.

5.2 Early-stage interventions

Early-stage interventions are those actions designed to support learners to access higher education before the moment of admission, spanning from school level education to the point of entry in higher education. 

There should be a fostering of greater understanding about how Higher Education systems (and education systems overall) feed into inequality, exclusion, disadvantage, and polarisation within societies. Research should delve into prospective students’ reasoning on whether to enter higher education, what field to study in, what type of education to seek, and other such concerns.  These choices, and the student’s freedom, or lack thereof, in making them, greatly affect their future as well as the society at large. 

Early-stage interventions are a key mechanism to achieve the goal of widening access and participation in Higher Education. From an early age on, such as already in primary and secondary education systems and based on research, both direct and implicit barriers to enable the access to Higher Education must be removed, along with cultural and social barriers restricting access and choice for students. This also applies to prospective mature students, and those on different education paths. 

The early-stage interventions should be coupled with measures on entry, such as guidance programmes, academic goal setting, tutoring, first year transition programs, learning communities and other such mechanisms. 

5.3 Recognition of prior learning

Recognition of prior non-formal and informal learning is particularly relevant for those students that do not possess formal qualifications or certificates, yet they developed skills through non-formal means. For both admission and progression in higher education, recognition of prior learning (RPL) supports a more diverse body of students entering and progressing through higher education. In order to achieve these goals, regulation should be in place to enforce RPL, while resources should be dedicated to train the staff for this process. RPL should be flexible and fair, while ensuring that information is widely available to students. 

5.4 Social dimension in student centred learning

Student centred approaches in learning and teaching play a crucial role in creating inclusive higher education systems responsive to the diverse needs of all students. A strong connection between student centred learning (SCL) and the social dimension of higher education should be reflected in the creation of flexible learning pathways, as well as curricula design, and innovative pedagogical methods. All three should strive to meet the individual needs and goals of students, based on mutual respect between student and teacher in the learning context. A mindset of co-creation between students and teachers enhances trust in the system and supports learners’ motivation. 

This way, the expectations and objectives of each student become an important part of any learning process, enabling students to have individualised learning paths, study at different paces and in different situations in life. In order to support SCL, universal design must be an inherent practice in processes ranging from compiling study materials to designing infrastructure. SCL is fundamental to establishing inclusive practices within higher education institutions. Besides actively engaging students within their academic communities and fostering the values of active citizenship and democratic participation, SCL can also lead to a significantly higher quality of education and improve student retention rates in higher education institutions[14].

One essential part of student-centred learning is the assessments. While they should be based on the learning outcomes, adaptations should be put in place to ensure they are inclusive for all students, irrespective of their special needs. Fostering the mental health of students, as well as the error culture in higher education, means that no punitive measures, such as limiting social financial aid, should be in place for failing assessments or prolongation of studies beyond the expected normal duration. 

Elements related to inclusivity should be part of any teaching and other relevant programmes in higher education institutions, as developing related skills for students who later become teachers in schools is equally important for reducing inequality in lifelong learning and society. 

The digital environment poses new challenges for both student-centred learning and digitalisation. The digital transition should leave no one behind and students who lack either the equipment, the software, or the skills to navigate through the digital learning space should be fully supported, while also ensuring that the digital applications are themselves inclusive. With the surge of Artificial Intelligence, guaranteeing that the tools used in higher education are free of biases and discrimination is of utmost priority. If the higher education institution decides to use specific software for certain courses, be it normal programmes or those involving AI, these tools must be provided to all students free of charge and if a student also faces problems accessing technology instruments and the Internet to use them, the higher education institution must cover this expense as well or offer adequate alternatives free of charge.

5.5 Curriculum  

In order to reflect the diversity of voices and experiences in society students should have access to a diverse curriculum. They should be made aware of materials created by a diverse range of people. This must include, but is not limited to gender diversity, Disabled people, LGBT+, ethnic minorities, neurodiversity, migrants, indigenous people. An educational system that has a diverse curriculum, and which embeds learning about the principles of and understandings of liberation within it, will help ensure our teaching and learning is reflective of its learners, meaning they can identify with what they are learning.

5.6 Language 

With a more diverse population of prospective and active students, stemming from the effects of demographic changes, migration and a concurrent push to include currently underrepresented groups in higher education, it is crucial that language barriers restricting access to education, culture and social life, as well as inclusion be addressed and overcome[15]. Higher education institutions must reflect social diversity by fostering multicultural and multilingual learning environments aimed at facilitating the inclusion of students from all backgrounds. The language requirements in admission systems should not be a barrier to students wishing to enter higher education. Students must be offered comprehensive, free, effective, and accessible language learning programmes. These must be available to all domestic and foreign individuals, including refugees, displaced persons and people with refugee-like status who require such support, to ensure sufficient proficiency in the language(s) studies are conducted in, in order to facilitate their entry to higher education.

In the admission process there must be recognition for prior learning of the language requirements if they exist. In addition, sufficient language support during studies should be available to the student throughout their studies and integrating progressively advancing language studies into the curriculum should be a key consideration, including language skills related to the study field of the programme while keeping in mind to not overwhelm the students with many language courses on top of their studies. This also must be offered to students who are embarking on mobility to support their transition to another country. 

In the process of increasing internationalisation, the English language has gained an important role within higher education[16]. However, the right of students to learn, to study and to be taught in the national language(s) must be firmly protected and supported with the required financial and organisational resources. Furthermore, the rights of minority language students, as well as prospective students with minority language backgrounds, need to be protected in HE systems. Degrees and programmes offered in regional, or minority languages shouldn’t be restricted, sufficient financial means should be available to support these, and they must be subject to the same quality standards as others. 

VII. FAIR & SUPPORTIVE ENVIRONMENTS FOR STAFF

Keeping in mind the importance of staff who are employed in higher education institutions, irrespective of the type of contract or their status, we should fully acknowledge the necessity for fair and supportive work environments. A good working environment promotes good health and wellbeing. This allows and encourages staff to grow, develop and foster access to quality education and inclusive environments. We must recognize that staff working conditions directly relate to student learning conditions. This also applies to students who are engaged in employment within their institutions. Issues such as precarity, low pay, attacks on pensions and gender, ethnic, and other minority pay gaps are affecting staff and thus impact the learning and teaching process. Recognising these issues, staff must be paid an equitable, living wage for their work. As the society and HE is changing rapidly, mechanisms should be in place to analyse the needs of staff and to ensure proper training for staff, to equip them with sufficient resources and qualifications as well as teaching, language, multicultural and interpersonal skills. In addition, good working conditions in higher education institutions will help to foster the diversity among the staff members because vulnerable groups are in many situations less likely to take the risk of pursuing a career in academia. This would again have a positive effect on the diversity of students.

Furthermore, training should be made available to staff both in initial and continuous professional development so that they are able to play their part in implementing social dimension policies and fostering inclusive approaches. These facilities should be free and higher education institutions should also allocate time and resources for the staff to attend.

VIII. STUDENT SUPPORT SYSTEMS

Free student support systems must be available to all but take into consideration students in marginalised groups. ESU demands that higher education should be free for all students. The affordability of higher education is often mentioned when discussing the social dimension of higher education, especially from the point of view of accessibility and completion of studies. However, affordability needs to be understood as a broad concept, containing all sorts of financial and material aspects of education. These aspects, or costs, can be divided into two categories: direct costs and indirect costs. 

1. Direct costs and tuition fees 

The direct costs include everything that is directly linked to the programme chosen by the student: tuition fees, books, tools, and materials necessary for class work or practical learning experiences, exams and research, among others. The direct costs also span over the digital equipment and software needed to fulfil the responsibilities in relation to the study programme and, if applicable, to attend classes.

According to the most recent Eurostudent data[17], in 2019 (before the covid and inflation crises, which put additional strain on students) more than 1 in 4 students had financial difficulties. In this regard, support systems must be established in order to help less advantaged students to cover their tuition fees, buy materials needed, or mitigate other costs. These are the support systems that are often the most talked about when tackling financial accessibility. They are much needed – having to pay tuition or other administrative fees, such as registration fees, or purchase a number of books at the beginning of a semester can become a barrier for less privileged students, for example from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds. In order to enable everyone to study, it is essential that systems are set to help them cover these direct costs. 

2. Direct costs: Grants and loans

It is crucial to reaffirm that eliminating tuition fees is the simplest and best way to improve the accessibility of higher education and ESU stands strongly in favour of this being the goal of every higher education system. This is also in line with the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, ratified by most European states, and derives from higher education being a human right. 

Keeping this in mind, even systems with no tuition fees often place financial burdens on students through indirect or hidden costs. In any case, removing all tuition fees is not the final step towards having an inclusive HE system and countries should provide enough financial support for students to be able to sustain themselves and compensate for the direct and indirect costs of studying. 

Grants should be the main solution set by states to support students. They should be sufficient to enable students from any background to undertake and complete their study programme in the best conditions possible. While ESU supports the implementation of universal-based grants, accessible by all students, when due to various reasons universal-based grants cannot be provided, it is crucial that countries offer need-based grants with no merit-based strings attached. While we acknowledge the diversity of models of financing, any funding model must ensure that disadvantaged students are supported to access higher education without barriers. 

These grants should also reflect costs of living in the location of study and the amount should be increased at least by inflation rate and regularly updated to ensure they are keeping up with increased costs. The grants should take into account the cost of living, but also all relevant associated costs to higher education, including indirect ones if those are not already covered through other means (e.g. subsidies) for students. Student groups with additional fixed costs (e.g. students with caring obligations, students with children, disabled students) need to have additional financial support through additional grants or similar systems. In any case students’ grant systems should not interfere with other social benefit systems, leading to deprive the student of an effective financial support totally or partially regarding a particular issue.

Furthermore, there should not be any differentiation between fees for domestic students and international students, which only leads to discrimination and downward trends of internationalisation and all its associated benefits. In order to support lifelong learning, covering also second degrees should be promoted as much as possible. 

In some countries, loan systems are designed to support direct or indirect costs for students. Despite the financial support given by the government, for example zero-interest loans, flexible repayments or cap on instalments based on income and statute of limitations, studies[18] suggest that students from poverty backgrounds tend to not take loans due to debt aversion, thus the system failing those in need. Furthermore, they point out that loan bearers have less financial wellbeing across lifetime or worse capacity for saving or owning a house, thus undermining educations capacity to promote social mobility. In countries which introduced loan systems to replace grants, studies [19] show that they do not adequately target the disadvantaged groups, they increase employment along with studies, including for precarious income, and students tend to choose shorter, cheaper study programmes. A student loan system is broken if it leaves students with debt that is only manageable to those with stable financial situations, or those coming from a wealthy background. 

ESU is strongly in favour of the establishment of grant systems therefore excluding loan systems, as loan systems only reflect a failure by the state to provide a sufficient grant system and public services. Comprehensive grant systems are the way to effectively support students because it does not create a debt for those who are already the most in need of financial support.

If a student loan system is in use, the focus of its development should be on improving risk protection so that the system provides real protection for taking a loan. The best way to do this is through interest protection, fixed interest rates, payment moratoriums and interest allowance provided by the state.

Grants do not only guarantee more accessibility to higher education, they also enable students to have more chances of completing their studies, as they lessen the likelihood of having to work an excessive amount of hours to earn enough money to sustain a decent living standard. 

Whether through grants, free or subsidised services, or any combination of these, states must ensure that students from any background are able to undertake and complete their studies. ESU also maintains a strong position that loan systems are not a replacement, nor should they be considered an alternative to the obligations of the states to provide comprehensive study grants. Student support mechanisms, such as grants, should not be given based on performance criteria, such as academic merits, but should be applied universally or at least need-based. Automatic enrolment and opt-out systems need to be preferred to prevent placing undue burdens on students. Guidance needs to be provided to ensure that all are treated equally and can access the same amount of support if eligible and available.

3. Indirect costs: Housing, transport and meals 

The indirect costs of higher education are less often mentioned than the direct ones. Less visible at first glance, they can prove to be one of the many barriers to higher education. The most important indirect costs are housing, transportation and meals. 

Housing is a human right. Adequate housing must provide more than four walls and a roof. As evidenced by Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, a number of conditions must be met before particular forms of shelter can be considered to constitute “adequate housing.

Regarding student housing, four principles must guide policy aimed at it: affordability, accessibility, quality, and sustainability. States and higher education institutions must make sure that anyone who wishes to study in Higher Education has access to an affordable place to live. 

This can be achieved through designated student housing, but in cases where that isn’t sufficient, policies and systems must be in place to ensure affordability in the rental market. Support for housing can be offered both through grants for students or indirect means of covering the costs (e.g. subsidising student housing). 

States have an obligation to actively ensure that enough affordable, accessible, and quality housing is available. Alternatives forms of deliberate (co-)living, such as flat-sharing or intergenerational co-living should be legally framed. When considering availability, the variety of housing should also be kept in mind, to ensure access to higher education for people with varying needs. This affects especially those students with accessibility requirements, since regular rental markets are often unable to meet their needs, and they often face discrimination and exclusion.

Similarly, both short-term and recurrent temporary housing needs to be available for mobile students, students travelling between campuses for studies, and students with other such needs. Finally, the quality and environmental sustainability of the housing is of utmost importance. Any housing meant for students needs to provide facilities needed to sustain a decent life, be up to high construction standards, universally designed, properly heated, clean and with adequate facilities. Students should not be forced out of their student housing at any point during the length of their study period. Ideally, there should also be a buffer period after the studies have ended and during the summer/outside of term time. In all situations, there should be a notice period for the termination for any tenancy.

Students, including those from disadvantaged or marginalised backgrounds must be meaningfully included in decision making over design of student housing and infrastructure for student use, as well as policy making within the same field. States need to work proactively to guarantee a legal environment that prevents discrimination, fraudulent practices, and exploitation of students seeking housing. 

Access to housing has to be free from any discrimination, unnecessary hassle, and struggles. Special protections must be in place for prospective students who are at a higher risk of encountering racism, xenophobia, ableism, queerphobia, LGBTQ+phobia and exclusion due to their background or accessibility requirements. Everyone starting their studies or moving anywhere to study should feel secure in their access to housing.

Another indirect cost of education, and a potential obstacle to access to higher education, is transportation. Free, accessible, sustainable and efficient transport options must exist for students, to ensure equal access to Higher Education. Public transportation needs to be free for students regardless of their age. Accessibility requirements must be an essential concern in the design of transport networks and infrastructure. Transport must be accessible to all, including those from disadvantaged backgrounds and/or having specific needs such as those with disabilities or caring responsibilities.

Access to quality food and nutrition is another human right that has distinct applications for student life. Governments and higher education institutions should support students to afford nutritious food, inclusive for various dietary requirements. This can be done through measures such as including the costs of meals in the calculation of grants, subsidising student canteens or offering student discounts.  

Finally, increasing the diversity of the higher education system means more adult learners, as well as students with caring responsibilities access higher education. Pursuing a degree should not be limited by the capacity to financially support these responsibilities, and dedicated policy measures, support systems and funding incentives should be in place for these students. 

4. Indirect costs: access to cultural activities and opportunities

The right to freely participate in cultural life was recognised by UNESCO with its Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 and then confirmed in 1966 with the Council of Europe’s International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Access to cultural activities and opportunities is fundamental to promoting student participation and social cohesion. The higher education institution life of each student should not only focus on studying and attending lectures but should give everyone the opportunity to participate in cultural activities, both in financial and time terms. This includes, but is not limited to, participation in the cultural and social events promoted within higher education institutions, the possibility of visiting museums and other places of cultural interest, going to the cinema, theatre, or a concert.

It is of paramount importance that each state is committed to providing equal and free access to these educational opportunities for both students studying in that country and students coming from abroad. When organising these activities, it is also crucial to consider accessibility for all students.

In the promotion of cultural activities, in higher education institution cities and especially within higher education institutions, a fundamental role is played by student associations. Each state must commit itself so that all higher education institutions can give student associations the possibility and the necessary funds to promote cultural activities, according to the interests of the different associations, as long as they are respectful of everyone’s background and do not promote anti-democratic sentiments.

The higher education institutions must undertake to make their spaces open to the organisation of these cultural events, whether they are conferences or gatherings to animate the university facilities and must support the student associations in their realisation.

Finally, in order for all students to enrich their higher education experience with cultural activities, higher education institutions should strive to encourage student participation in these activities. Specifically, leisure time has to be taken into account when designing the different learning opportunities.

5. Counseling and guidance services

Governments and higher education institutions have a shared role in ensuring that proper policies are in place to secure the availability of accurate, timely, qualitative, accessible, reliable, and effective information, counselling and guidance about prospects in higher education for potential and enrolled students in order to increase their access, participation in and completion of higher education studies.[20]

The diversity of prospective students’ backgrounds needs to be fully understood and taken into account by Higher Education Institutions, especially when communicating about their programmes, in order to include as many potential students as possible and maximise the likelihood of completion. Accurate and student-friendly guidance and information when considering entering or continuing in HE will lead to students being able to choose what type of higher education, as well as what programme would suit them best. Those responsible for delivering student guidance should have the possibility to be trained accordingly, in order to ensure their services are adequate to the needs of a diverse student population.

When entering higher education, different types of counselling and guidance should be available to students, but especially psychological, academic and career counselling. These types of counselling should be adapted to various student needs and groups and have coordination at institution level. There should be constant communication between the organisers of these services, mentors/tutors for students and other structures with the higher education institutions, in order to support synergy of actions and improved strategies, learning environments and wellbeing of students. 

6. Contact points and information provision

Sufficient information on the available support systems must be provided – students must not be restricted from accessing these due to non-accessible administrative paths, too long bureaucratic delays or due to the lack of awareness of the existence of such systems where they actually exist. Higher education institutions should provide points of contact for students for all related matters related to student life and inclusivity policies, serving as a one-stop shop that can then direct students to dedicated departments and support them in their requests.  

7. Specific services and adaptations for underrepresented students 

Support services should be available and accessible to all students; however some students may require targeted support to ensure their success in higher education. All students deserve a sense of belonging in the higher education community. Some students may find the transition into higher education challenging. We need to ensure that they have smooth transitions within higher education.

Adult learners, refugee learners and many other categories of underrepresented students have different needs that the policies of higher education institutions need to be adapted to. Some student groups such as Disabled students and students with caring responsibilities may have higher costs. Spending on specialist disability-related products and services that are essential and often costly; and include vital specialist equipment, mobility aids, car or home adaptations, medicines and therapies and others which are all expensive. They have to spend more on everyday things, there are often fewer accessible rooms available in student accommodation and it often comes at a higher cost. They are reliant on paying more for transport as often public transport isn’t accessible. Student support such as grants should cover these. They should not be at a disadvantage to disabled students. Disabled students should be able to participate in all aspects of student life. They are often excluded from activities non-disabled students take part in.

Students in need of assistive technology, educational aids should receive these free of charge. This includes glasses and optical health. There should be support and information about the availability and how to use these. 

In order to ensure the compatibility of higher education with care responsibilities, it is essential that special support services are provided for these students. There needs to be provisions such as childcare facilities and flexibility in learning pathways.

IX. HEALTH POLICIES 

Health is a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity. The enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being without distinction of race, religion, political belief, economic or social condition[21].

Students often live in uncertainty due to their lack of financial security. This uncertainty takes its toll on mental and physical health, with both being essential to succeeding in one’s studies. Good health and wellbeing, whether mental or physical, should not be a luxury but a right. Students deserve good quality free healthcare and must have access to the health care that they need, without engaging any anticipated costs.

Thus, access to comprehensive and adequate health care is required. It is important that, when students make use of these support systems, their confidentiality is always guaranteed, except in cases where the medical practitioner is required by law to breach confidentiality. It is up to the states, but also to the higher education institutions to provide adequate support in this regard. Higher education institutions have a responsibility for their students’ mental health. The learning and teaching styles and assessment have an impact on students’ health. It is an environment which is new to many in a time in their lives with a lot of changes and developments. There is a lot of pressure to succeed in the competitive environment and students are worried about other burdens in their lives. In most cases, higher education is designed for neurotypical people without taking into account the diversity of experiences and conditions, and can all be substantial barriers to access, transition and completion. This has the effect of systematically excluding many from less privileged backgrounds and conditions, or making success in higher education harder to achieve. 

Mental health

General mental health problems and mental illnesses are prevalent among students across Europe. The higher education institutions and governments must acknowledge that learning and living conditions as well as the economic situation of students are central causes of this problem. Effective social policies, affordable housing schemes, and access to student financing along with curricula and examination methods that reduce psychological stress are important ways to prevent ill mental health. Low-threshold psychological counselling has to be made available free of charge to all students who need it. Counselling facilities need to have sufficient capacities to guarantee timely access. Additionally, as the prevalence of mental health problems amongst students is higher than in the general population, mental health services in cities and regions with a high student population need to be able to increase their capacities accordingly.

Stigma attached to mental health conditions remains a barrier to understanding and receiving support. To this day, societal stigma remains arguably the most prominent barrier to an individual accessing support for mental health difficulties. We must engage actively in breaking down the stigma surrounding mental health in order to ensure those who need help feel comfortable reaching out, ultimately improving accessibility to mental health supports. Students whose identities are intersecting axes of inequality must receive targeted support from services. 

Another important factor for students’ mental health is their work-life balance. Students need to be motivated and stimulated by their study material. At the same time, burnouts and living in a constant rush for deadlines will take its toll on the students. For this reason, institutions should assess the workload of their degree and how it affects students’ work life balance.

There needs to be funding for students to have spaces and resources for extracurricular activities, which the student can participate in in their free time and which form the basis of their interaction to the rest of the student community. These allow for students to find a sense of belonging which can combat loneliness and prevent mental ill health. Students should have enough time available to be able to participate in such activities if they so wish.

Lastly, it is vital that information provision about mental health is present at all institutions. This includes both substantive information (for example about suicide prevention, stress, or anxiety) and procedural information (for example about possible trust-persons, study advisors or healthcare professionals). In addition, teaching staff need to be educated on this topic and on their responsibilities (for example in signalling problems, referring students to the right place).

Physical health

1. Physical activity 

Students should be have access to physical activity and as recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO), the “higher education institutions (should) provide supportive and safe spaces and facilities for all students to spend their free time actively”.[22]

Physical activity offers significant benefits for both physical and mental health, leading to enhance learning and teaching. Not only can it prevent and manage many diseases and health conditions, like for instance reducing symptoms of depression and anxiety, it can also encourage social contact between students, contributing to social integration. Therefore, students should have the free time and means to participate in line with the guidelines.

2. End period poverty for students

Menstruation can be a barrier to free and accessible education. There is still a lot of stigma attached to menstruating, this can have a lasting impact on students’ lives and wellbeing. We need to work towards breaking down this stigma and normalize menstruation, by providing necessary information and encouraging the dialogue on menstruation as well as its consequences and daily repercussion. Furthermore, having a period should not limit participation in daily life or education. There needs to be flexibility for students who are menstruating as many experience symptoms that impact on their studies and daily life. Many students across Europe cannot afford to buy period products, being able to access period products is fundamental to equality and dignity. Period products should therefore be made free for students. All toilets must have disposal for period products.

3. Students sexual health

Sexual health is fundamental for the overall health and wellbeing of students. Sexual health requires a positive approach to sexuality and sexual relationships. Students must have the possibility to have safe sexual experiences. They must be able to live in an environment that affirms and promotes sexual health. Students must have access to free sexual health care, it must be free from discrimination and coercion. Students should have access to good quality information about sex and sexuality. There must also be information and training on consent and preventing sexual violence. There must be sexual health support services available and accessible to all students. 

4. Dental health

Oral health and hygiene is often seen as a separate part of the healthcare system. Dental healthcare is often expensive and therefore a cost that students postpone. As such the dental healthcare should be covered by the healthcare systems. 

X. RESEARCH AND DATA COLLECTION

To ensure the greatest possible social impact of measures designed to broaden the accessibility of higher education, policy-making must rely on high quality research that involves the participation of representatives of affected populations in the process. Thorough research must be conducted to explore what is keeping people from varying backgrounds and conditions from accessing, transitioning within, or completing higher education as well as on the impact and efficiency of the measures proposed or put in place to address the barriers. 

To be able to meet the objectives laid out in this paper, countries need to have a very clear understanding of what constitutes the underrepresented, disadvantaged and minority groups within their respective societies. 

Furthermore, research should help policy makers understand what disadvantaged, underrepresented and vulnerable groups consist of and best tailored measures for these categories in an intersectional approach. 

However, the potential effects that social research can have on vulnerable populations must always be taken into account. Care should be taken to avoid essentializing social groups. The development of methodologies of data collection should involve the participation of people from varying backgrounds to provide feedback on practices of categorization based on group identity. 

Furthermore, careful attention has to be paid to the security of every individual data, this means to ensure proper data protection and to anonymize collected data. This is of special importance when it comes to the safeguarding of minorities and groups that are discriminated against and it should generally be the ethical foundation of research and data protection. Security of data and participation of representatives of the various groups in the design of research would also increase trust in sharing experiences.

The data collection exercises at both national and institutional level should be regular, in order to ensure comparability and evidence trends and be followed-up by meaningful actions. Databases should be made interoperable in order to support both research and access to public services. 

Data on available advice, support, funding and regulations for underrepresented, disadvantaged and vulnerable groups, as well as the results of research should be public and accessible. 

It is crucial that governments invest in systematic data collection and take part in internationally recognised research projects, such as Eurostudent, which offer an indispensable and comparable knowledge base on the student condition at European level from which measures can be designed by policy makers at all levels.

Annexed statements:

• Statement on Housing and Transportation
• Mental Health Charter
• Statement on quality and fair Internships
• Statement on neurodivergent students
• Statement on anti-discrimination
• Statement on the experiences and rights of LGBT+ students

—

1. London Communique, http://ehea.info/Upload/document/ministerial_declarations/2007_London_Communique_English_588697.pdf
2. Tupan-Wenno, M., Camilleri, A.F., Fröhlich M., King, S. (2016) Effective Approaches to Enhancing the Social Dimension of Higher Education. Knowledge Innovation Centre.
3. Tupan-Wenno, M., Camilleri, A.F., Fröhlich M., King, S. (2016) Effective Approaches to Enhancing the Social Dimension of Higher Education. Knowledge Innovation Centre.
4. OECD, Education at a Glance: OECD Indicator
5. Ogg J, A Brief Profile of the New British Establishment, The Political Quarterly, Volume 77, Issue s1, 2006.
6. Bynner J, Egerton M, The Wider Benefits of HE, Report by HEFCE and the Smith Institute, HEFCE report, 01/46, 2001.
7. Mandemakers J, Monden C, Does education buffer the impact of disability on psychological distress, Social Science & Medicine, 2010, Volume 71, Issue 2, pp. 288 – 297, 2010.
8. McMahon W.W, Higher Learning, Greater Good: the private and social benefits of higher education, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2009.
9. The European Qualifications Passport for Refugees is a document providing an assessment of the higher education qualifications based on available documentation and a structured interview. (https://www.coe.int/en/web/education/recognition-of-refugees-qualifications).
10. https://www.iom.int/sites/g/files/tmzbdl486/files/documents/ERN%2Bfeasibility-study-Higher-Education-Scholarships-for-Refugees.pdf
11. Curaj, A., Deca, L. and Pricopie, R. (2018) European Higher Education Area: The Impact of Past and Future Policies. Springer International Publishing.
12. OECD, Micro-credentials for lifelong learning and employability, 2023.
13. ESU, Quality Assurance Fit for Future – Students’ Perspective, 202.
14. Attard, A., Di Ioro, E., Geven, K. and Santa, R. (2016) Student Centred Learning: Toolkit for Students, Staff and Higher Education Institutions. Brussels.
15. Ó Maoláin, A., Popescu, C., Bergan, G., Sallinen, J., Savola, P., de Bruijn, S., Dalen, S., Servant, T. and Grønne, V. (2016) Handbook for National Unions of Students on Students with a Migrant or Ethnic Minority Background. Brussels.
16. Garrett, P. and Balsà, L.G. (2014) International universities and implications of internationalisation for minority languages: views from university students in Catalonia and Wales. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development: 35 (4), pgs 361-375.
17. Eurostudent VII, Social and Economic Conditions of Student Life in Europe, 2021.
18. OECD (2020), Resourcing Higher Education: Challenges, Choices and Consequences, Higher Education, OECD Publishing, Paris and those quoted there.
19. Pedro N. Teixeira, Cost-sharing and accesibility in higher education: a fairer deal?
20. BFUG Advisory Group 1 Social Dimension (2018-2020)- Draft Version of the Principles and Guidelines of the Social Dimension http://www.ehea.info/Upload/BFUG_FI_TK_67_5_5b_AG1_Principles_and_Guidelines.pdf
21. https://www.who.int/about/governance/constitution
22. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/physical-activity

The post Policy Paper on Social Dimension – BM85 appeared first on European Students' Union.

The post Internationalisation and Mobility Policy Paper – BM84 appeared first on European Students' Union.

What is higher education? 

Education has become a core institution of our society and one of the main pillars of modern civilisation. It plays a central role in social and economic development, democratic empowerment and the advancement of the general well-being of societies. 

Higher education is and has always been a human institution for advancing and passing on cultural and intellectual heritage and is a human right guaranteed in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. It is a public good, public responsibility, and therefore should be publicly steered and supported and not become a subject to economic speculation and prey to the ideologies of privatisation and the shrinking of the state. 

Taking into account the diversity of the population and the different needs of the individuals, higher education must be able to serve different needs and targets at the same time. It is of utmost importance that the multifunctional idea of higher education is implemented, strengthened and focused on by those responsible for policy-making. 

Higher Education should not be directed towards short-term goals of the labour market but should create a chance for acquiring competence and understanding. Democratic values and skills as well as language competencies are needed in the globalised world and a key for sustainable development of a society where everyone can live together peacefully. Solidarity, responsibility, diversity, societal impact, and cooperation should be the main concerns in the development of higher education institutions, shaping the multicultural future we will be living in. This can be seen as part of the long-term transformation of higher education away from being a tool for the elite toward a tool for the whole of society and all individuals. 

Who is higher education for? 

Higher education is an inalienable and fundamental human right. As such it must be open to all parts of the society, independent of the background, age or any other factor. Access must be free, not only economically free but also without barriers. Access should not be considered solely as admission to higher education, but more holistic as the means, structures and mechanisms by which students are supported during their studies. However, access should be always accompanied with acquiring the necessary tools to succeed when leaving higher education. 

Educational systems must be designed in such a way that the choices made during primary and secondary education do not hinder access to higher education. Educational systems’ built-in mechanisms maintaining socioeconomic divides must be identified and tackled accordingly. 

Ways of enabling wider access to higher education to marginalised groups must be implemented, in order to create an inclusive environment mirroring society and all its diversity. The access to higher education should not be subject to discrimination. Any kind of unequal treatment is condemned by ESU.

What are the interactions between Higher Education and communities? 

Higher education is neither a separate entity nor does it have its own sphere of reality separate from the rest of society. It is an important part of society, although its role is too often ignored or misunderstood. Higher education plays a crucial role in the development of the society as a whole and for the growth of the local communities that each Institution belongs to. 

Higher education provides society with a fundamental basis, which allows for constant social development and improvement in living standards of the whole community. 

Higher education has multiple purposes; it ensures the existence and the well-being of democratic principles, such as critical thinking, active participation, active citizenship, freedom of speech, freedom of thought, and fight against authoritarian ideologies. In this sense, Higher Education works not only for those who are enrolled in it but also for the rest of the community, especially through the continuous creation of knowledge and the ability to address the challenges faced by the local communities. This is linked to the role of research, done by Higher Education Institutions, which also needs to be free, accessible for everyone and needs to get more funds, to ensure its autonomy and availability. Conducting research and publishing scientific results also fulfil academia’s duty to serve the community with knowledge and technology. 

Therefore, all outcomes of scientific activities should be publicly available and free for use. Furthermore, HEIs should participate in the green and sustainable transformation of their communities and society at large. 

Higher education dialogue with local communities is embodied in the Third Mission of higher education, where constant dialogue with the social, cultural, economic and civil society enriches both the institutional policies of the single higher education institutions (HEIs) and the social fabric of the territories where HEIs are located. The green and digital transitions require future-proofing education, research and innovation, in close cooperation with the related industries and stakeholders. Students, staff and local communities need to be equipped with the green and digital skills for the future. It is important that the Third Mission of HE is enacted within a framework of academic freedom, institutional autonomy and public responsibility, avoiding any commodification tendencies as well as any dependencies on the private sector. 

Higher education relations with the community are also embodied by the work-based learning possibilities offered through internships. It is of paramount importance that students have the choice of the learning path, that are subject to an agreement through which students accessing said internships have the sufficient legal provisions with all the workers’ social security provisions and that are sufficiently paid. Internships must be a way for students to enrich their experience, and not a less expensive substitute for paid labour. 

There is an obligation for all members of the higher education community to work as a community, with each other’s needs and best interests at heart. This demands innovation and excellence in the process of teaching and learning, administration, staff-student relations, quality assurance and both institutional and student self-governance. While digitalisation has become a prominent feature of higher education due to the covid-19 pandemic, it is important on the one hand to underline the new opportunities, risks and inequalities that this process entails; on the other hand, the European Students’ Union reaffirms the importance of the social experience that in-presence learning has in shaping the student experience and the sense of belonging and agency within an academic community.

What is the outcome? 

The goal of higher education should be to provide the potential for as many different outcomes and outcome combinations as possible. As education is a lifelong process, it is vital that these outcomes are accessible at all times. The pace of change in the course of just the last decades makes a very clear illustration that not only it is impossible, but even more so inadvisable to attempt to predict what skills, competencies and knowledge will be needed in the future. 

The key capacity for participants in higher education that must be provided is the capacity to think critically. Knowledge is a value in itself, and the capacity to effectively and usefully analyse and evaluate information, while also developing a satisfactory way of life, is the key to this. To ensure this, the process of teaching and learning must be student-centred. Higher education must provide the students with interdisciplinary knowledge relevant for but not limited to the working environment and skills oriented to the needs and satisfaction of society, and enable the student to apply them. Higher education must have a meaning in a person’s life and prepare it qualitatively to apply the acquired knowledge in society. 

Knowledge and preparation for employment are just two out of many outcomes that can be delivered by higher education. Higher education has the potential to dramatically improve life quality for both the participant and for all of society – social and financial status, improvement in general health conditions, acknowledgement of and attempts to tear down inequalities. These skills are necessary for democratic and sustainable development and participation, and a society where these competencies exist among more of the population is more likely to be able to handle the challenges posed by an increasingly globalised, multicultural and ecologically fragile world. In short, higher education equips people with the tools to make more informed choices.

Who is affected? 

Everyone is affected. In times of economic hardship, the popular debate tends to focus entirely on student employment and the economy. However, the effects of higher education are wide-reaching and not only for those who have the opportunity to study. Higher education should enable critical thinking and self-reflection and not only be about learning pre-determined skills. Individual and collective advantages of education are therefore closely linked. Education should not only enable individuals to take their living conditions into their own hands but also to collectively work for a better future for society. Higher education is of general interest to all people, as it contributes to the common good by increasing the general level of education, societal development, democracy and well-being. 

A public higher education system also affects society in a much broader way than a privatised system. The benefits to society of a highly educated population, outside of purely education-specific metrics vary from keeping down the costs of healthcare and public school systems to much higher levels of social trust. Social trust is paramount if a society is to build up functioning support systems and keep corruption as well as crime down. 

Perhaps the most challenging to measure, but the most valuable effect of higher education is the proliferation of harnessed creativity. A graduate who has the capacity to react to and develop their own innate creativity feeds into a global pattern of unprecedented advances and innovations. This benefits everybody, not solely employers, NGOs or political systems: it increases equality, develops healthcare, devises and improves new technologies, explores and understands our lives and our universe, extends and improves human life, educates future generations to embrace and excel to their own potential and advances the fundamental goal of human equality.

Who is responsible? 

Higher education is a public responsibility. The greatest benefit of a multi-functional higher education system accrues to society overall. Therefore, a huge part of the responsibility is going back to society. This responsibility consists of two parts. On the one hand, it includes challenging higher education and addressing clear needs towards higher education. On the other hand, the overall society is the fundamental funding source of higher education to a sustainable level, which should not impact admissions or accessibility within the sector, or equality of participation. Although other groups are responsible towards higher education, these others are not related to the funding. 

As education is a fundamental human right, access to education at any level should be ensured by the overall society through their taxation systems and governments. All people involved in higher education must share responsibility for the design and development of higher education: students, researchers, teachers, institutional leadership, and academic and non-academic staff. Their involvement should be based on the principle of modern collegiality, where all the formal and informal decision-making bodies of higher education, at all levels, are collegiate and have democratically elected representatives of the different components of higher education, which in turn must be treated equally and be in constant dialogue with their constituency. Student representatives have a special role within these bodies, as they represent the category which is most directly impacted by the decisions taken. Furthermore, effective quality assurance and efficient governance and financing of higher education are inseparable. 

Higher education needs constant development and the groups inside higher education must ensure that this occurs. This should be done with constant internal and external feedback from the local communities, the social, cultural and civil society as well as employers in both the public and private sector while safeguarding the independence, academic freedom and institutional autonomy of the HEIs. 

The Bologna Process and the European Higher Education Area

Introduction 

ESU acknowledges that the Bologna process has a great influence on higher education in Europe, as many European countries are reforming or have reformed their higher education systems in light of the Bologna declaration and following communiqués. However, we believe that we are still far from achieving a fully functioning European Higher Education Area. 

The main challenges of the current process from the students’ perspective have been: inconsistency or lack of implementation at the national level; pushing of national reforms under the pretext of the Bologna Process; subjective interpretations of certain European targets and guidelines, poor follow-up on previous commitments, scant involvement of higher education stakeholders in the implementation of Bologna commitments and lack of independent reporting on its progress. 

Nevertheless, ESU is committed to a European Higher Education Area that promotes and delivers high quality, accessible and student-centred education; social justice, participative equity, opportunities for mobility and serves as the foremost way to fix a broken social ladder; and autonomous, academically free and democratically led higher education institutions, which create critical thinkers and active citizens in democratic societies. 

ESU recognises that these are all equally relevant and interlinked goals. Autonomy of the academic sector is a tool to protect the right to freedom of expression, diversity of methods and content of education and research. Therefore, autonomy must not be used as a way of putting universities in a competition based development or as a means to evade student rights or quality standards. Democratic higher education institutions cannot exist without social justice and participative equity. Participative equity is a stimulating factor for high-quality education because it is enrichment for the educational environment. By ensuring the participation of a diverse student body in the higher education decision-making process, a student-centred approach can be fostered. Therefore, these goals are mutually reinforcing. 

Thus, the European Higher Education Area must embed a quality culture whilst enshrining academic freedom; recognise that higher education is a human right, public good and public responsibility; work on the principle of cooperation, not a competition; include students as co-creators and partners in the delivery and governance of the learning experience and recognise its own responsibility to society itself as a social good, and as such, be publicly funded.

From the Bologna Process to the consolidation of the European Higher Education Area 

Due to the nature of the Bologna Process, the goals are often formulated in an abstract way in order to make it possible for every member state to agree to such a goal and for it to be acceptable in the national context. This created a problem for implementation on the ground, as the Bologna goals are rather disconnected from the reality at the institutional and national levels. ESU believes that such problems need to be addressed through a monitoring system with common definitions and common indicators, and through the use of national action plans that specify the action lines in more detail for each national context. National-specific objectives should be clearly formulated, which will increase its relevance and state clearer goals for the institutions, teaching and institutional staff, students and other stakeholders. 

Nonetheless, ESU warns that the Bologna Process’ aims cannot be reached as long as member states are approaching the implementation in an “à la carte” manner. National governments shall not handpick the reforms and action lines they want to work on and must make an effort to achieve more fundamental changes or address those areas that are of lower priority for governments. The action lines of the Bologna declaration and the subsequent communiqués are all interconnected and interdependent, so the reforms must be done in a comprehensive way. Countries need to make an express commitment to implement all the Bologna action lines equally. A fully functioning European Higher Education Area cannot be achieved without reaching minimum standards of commitment and integration. 

ESU believes that there should be a control mechanism that would verify that governments and institutions are not misusing the name of the Bologna process to justify policies that are unrelated to the Bologna implementation. The Bologna Follow-Up Group (BFUG) should find a way to ensure this. 

Moreover, ESU believes that Bologna signatory countries should commit to implement commonly agreed pan-European benchmarks stated in the Bologna process action lines. The Bologna Process needs to be rebuilt on an approach based on targets for minimum expected standards of implementation. Ignoring minimum standards risks affecting the coherency of the European Higher Education Area. 

While the structure of higher education systems is being reformed, little is being done to make it understandable, clear and comprehensible to the wider public, especially prospective students. ESU thinks that it is crucial to enhance the communication and outreach of the European Higher Education Area, putting in place adequate and accessible transparency and information tools about the European Higher Education Area. Ministers should commit to establish credible and easy-to-use guidance systems and communicate to everyone what the academic opportunities in the European Higher Education Area are about. The European Quality Assurance Register (EQAR) would be a suitable institution for providing if supported adequately. A true shift to a European area will not happen without these information support structures. 

Students should also easily have access to information concerning universities, courses and student support available in every country through the creation of a set of European guidelines on the description of study programmes. 

Policy scope of the Bologna process 

While the structural reforms for ensuring comparability and compatibility of the national systems of education have been at the core of the Bologna Process and the European Higher Education Area, ESU believes that the scope of the Bologna process needs to be expanded if the process is to remain relevant to all the signatory countries and ESU member unions. Therefore, ESU encourages more discussion on overarching issues such as the social dimension, mobility, recognition, funding, e-learning, student-centred learning, governance or research in the European Higher Education Area.

Structures and governance of the EHEA and the Bologna process 

More attention needs to be put on the governance of the Bologna Process and the European Higher Education Area. ESU believes that the Bologna Follow-Up Group (BFUG) should be given an even stronger voice during the entire process. The working groups should discuss the issues in-depth, prepare the background information and propose the issues to be discussed in the Bologna Follow-Up Group. 

Furthermore, ESU encourages the Bologna Follow-Up Group to explore possibilities for a permanent Bologna/EHEA Secretariat that would be responsible for supporting other structures of the Bologna process and the European Higher Education Area. ESU believes that the Bologna Secretariat should not be handed to any European institution, but should rather rely on the collective support of the Bologna participating countries and organisations. 

ESU believes that a fund should be created to support the permanent structures and common projects and events on relevant topics, allowing a more diverse group of countries to participate and take the lead in the follow-up activities. 

Stakeholders’ involvement in developing and implementing the Bologna Process 

One of the distinctive features of the Bologna Process has been the involvement of stakeholders, especially students, in the process since its early stages. ESU recognises that the stakeholders, through being consultative members of the process since its initial stages, have contributed significantly to the discussions and the developments of the different action lines. ESU stresses that trust, participation and ownership from the stakeholders have led to a better implementation of the reforms. A clear example is the Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area, one of the most successful Bologna tools, which were developed by the E4 group (ESU, ENQA, EUA and EURASHE) and have also been revised by them in cooperation with the social stakeholders. The recent involvement of stakeholders in the drafting of the Ministerial Communique is a welcomed development that needs to be pursued throughout the Bologna cycles. However, the situation on national level in many countries is fundamentally different, with student stakeholders involved in a tokenist manner or not involved at all in implementing Bologna reforms. It is of utmost importance that the path taken regarding student participation in the development and implementation of the Bologna Process is continued and enhanced on all levels.

Follow-up and monitoring of the Bologna Process 

While the current implementation and progress reports have contributed to accelerating the reform by exposing the countries’ evolution, ESU sees the need for an independent monitoring and reporting mechanism. Objective indicators, based on the above-mentioned student values of the Bologna Process, should be developed. Together with improved data gathering and analysis, this would present the basis for further discussion and actions; however, these indicators should not be used as a tool for incentive management of students or institutions. 

Furthermore, ESU encourages the Bologna Follow-Up Group to develop the methodology to complement the current reports. This should be done with better data gathering from different sources of information at the national level, especially from students and student representatives, as the ones directly impacted, and not just ministerial officials. Additionally, the possibility of organising on-site visits by experts from other countries should be considered, which would allow for proper evaluation of the implementation of the Bologna reforms as well as the effect that they had on the higher education system of the country.

Bologna implementation at the national level 

In order to achieve proper implementation on the national level, all member countries should establish (or continue) a structure with decision-making power that would include all stakeholders (akin to the Bologna Follow-Up Group) and would be responsible for the implementation and follow-up of the reforms while respecting the autonomy of higher education institutions. ESU is absolutely certain that consistent consultation and involvement of stakeholders at national levels are essential for a successful implementation of the Bologna reforms. Students, academic staff, institutional leadership and management as well as other stakeholders are the ones bearing the brunt of any change and thus should be part of any discussion and decision. 

Governments need to establish special incentives and provide a significant level of financial and regulatory support for institutions that are trying to implement various elements of the Bologna Process. There should be a system of scrutiny for the implementation of Bologna while focusing on improvement rather than penalisation. There should be tools developed for encouraging institutions to implement the Bologna process effectively. 

The European Union and the European Education Area

Introduction 

In the past years, European integration has increasingly proceeded with more discussions on the European level and more competencies being transferred to the EU or shared between the EU and its member states. The process of redefining basic values and principles in governance needs extensive discussions and strong involvement of affected stakeholders, especially students and higher education institutions. These processes increasingly involve the field of education: not only is higher education the subject of numerous conferences, papers and communications, but it is also affected by other agreements and regulations. 

This includes specifically the objective of the creation of a European Education Area by 2025, to which the project of the European Universities, the European Strategy for Universities and the proposed reforms under the collective name of ‘EU higher education package’ are corollaries. It also includes the investments under NextGenerationEU and the Recovery and Resilience Facility, as most National Recovery and Resilience Plans included investments and reforms in higher education as part of their recovery package. It also includes the proposed reform of the European Semester, its evaluation indicators and the alignment between its country-specific recommendations and the objectives of reforms under the National Recovery and Resilience Plans. The European Pillar of Social Rights, proclaimed by the European Parliament, the Council and the European Commission on the 17th of November 2017, is a positive example of unanimous support by the European institutions for education, the role it can play in strengthening society and its importance towards making more inclusive and just European societies. 

On the other hand, the austerity measures imposed by the European Union on countries in crisis after the Great Recession of 2008 and in the early 2010s have badly affected education, not only by causing the lack of funding for it but also enforcing a general disaffection to the topic of education, making it seem unnecessary in times of crisis when it is actually the best tool to overcome it. This brought also to the impossibility to fulfil previous commitments to be achieved by 2020. 

The renewed commitment by the European Union towards higher education through the project of the European Education Area by 2025 and the investments and reforms under the National Recovery and Resilience Plans need careful scrutiny at the different levels. Although some of the principles it should promote are in line with the students’ needs, many critical aspects are still unclear and potentially harmful, and their implementation at the different levels might deviate from the initial political will. It is paramount that ESU and its member unions are vigilant and work in synergy at the different levels. This is to ensure that higher education is not seen just as an economic instrument for competitiveness, but that all of its multiple purposes are acknowledged and equally promoted, as well as to ensure that the reforms do not hinder the hard-won victories of the past and do not create structural imbalances between and within the higher education systems.

Concentration of power within European institutions 

ESU supports transparent, democratic and academically free conditions in the EU. Higher education institutions and national higher education systems must maintain the right and the ability to adapt their offer to the needs and specificity of their communities and societies, while the role of the European Union should be to provide a ‘European added value’ through its framework, in close cooperation and through full consultation with all affected stakeholders, especially students, teachers and institutional staff and their democratically elected representatives, and higher education institutions, at the different levels, from the local to the European and transnational. 

The EU, especially through its partnerships, trade agreements and neighbourhood policies affect the higher education systems of many countries outside its borders. Therefore, when touching upon higher education, these policies should reflect commitments made by countries within the Bologna process and partnership countries as well as the fundamental values of the European Higher Education Area. 

ESU believes that the EU should be a tool to enhance development and cooperation in Europe and provide concrete, tangible ‘European added value’ available to and for the development of all HEIs and national higher education systems within the EU. Therefore, the EU should focus on supporting the countries and their multilateral commitments, by financing initiatives and incentivising investments in higher education. ESU firmly believes that the EU should reflect the interests of the countries and the academic community throughout its policies. These policies should not contradict other European agreements or structures; the EU should support the Bologna process and use the European Education Area as a framework of experimentation and stronger implementation of the Bologna commitments. Policies should also be in line with each other throughout the EU. There should be more cooperation between the DG Education and Culture, DG Research and Innovation and DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion at the European Commission as well as the Committee on Culture and Education (CULT) and the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) at the European Parliament.

Economic and social perspectives 

ESU believes that the European Commission should have a supportive role in the processes concerning higher education and should provide a ‘European added value’ when dealing with higher education. 

Clear and open discussions on the diversity of higher education systems are a requirement in order to mutualise the benefits of this diversity. These talks must include representatives of all stakeholders in the decision-making process. 

Higher education must never merely be used as a tool for economic goals. The EU must accept that education’s broadest primary purpose is for the development of societies, and reflect this in all legislative actions that have an impact on education systems. It is of utmost importance that the European Education Area is not used for the further commodification of higher education in Europe and the EU should not approach education policy solely from the perspective of growth and jobs in the EU economy. This is especially important with the interrelations between the European and the national levels, such as with the National Recovery and Resilience Plans: despite the good intentions to invest in education, there is a stronger trend of using the Recovery funds as a way to promote reforms that had been rejected by stakeholders in the past, especially in the fields of strengthened managerialisation of HE governance, stronger governmental role in steering the economic decisions of HE and reduced student involvement in governance. To counter these trends it is paramount that stakeholder involvement in the design and implementation of reforms is thoroughly pursued, and student coordination between the different levels of decision-making is essential to pursue this outcome. 

Higher education plays a primary role in preserving the existence of diversity in unity, as its connection with the local communities, it operates within helps preserve local identities in a context that also encourages them to encounter each other; in fact, giving the different local identities the space to exist, acknowledge and preserve their history and language, gives them the dignity and the strength to cooperate with other ones, understanding and respecting similarities and differences. The maintaining of a diverse, integrated framework of national higher education systems should always be taken into consideration when developing European policies on higher education. This is especially important for the development of European Universities. Legislative tools that would be given to them need to be available to all HEIs in Europe. On the issue of funding, on the one hand, the discussion on the financing of these alliances cannot drain resources from more generalistic programmes of cooperation such as Erasmus+; on the other hand, any possible integrated, multi-level funding agreements for the alliances must avoid creating an internal rift within national higher education systems based on the belonging to an alliance. 

Education is not a service that can be bought and sold between countries. Education should never be included in international trade agreements. Higher education institutions should not be considered companies for the purposes of EU legislation dealing with the freedom to compete in second markets. ESU would rather emphasise the essential role of higher education in order to fulfil the targets set in the European Pillar of Social Rights, and urge the European Commission, Parliament and Council to focus on education as a social equaliser and a public good: ESU believes that the current policy developments in the field of European HE must lead to an upward convergence of student rights and conditions between national higher education systems and that European students must have a common set of rights to be shared across the continent, as defined by ESU Student Rights Charter. In this respect, the discussion about the reform of the European Semester and its alignment with NextGenerationEU provide an opportunity to uphold the European Pillar of Social Rights and its educational side: the social pillar of the European Semester must be strengthened to match its macroeconomic imbalance pillar, and an ‘higher education scoreboard’ should be introduced to assess the policies and the levels of investments of the Member States, with indicators to be co-designed with European representative HE stakeholders. 

Democracy and transparency 

The work that the EU does must become more stakeholder-driven in the spirit of modern collegiality as outlined in ESU’s policy paper on public responsibility, governance and financing of higher education. This means that educational initiatives and decisions should be developed with relevant stakeholders. It should be students, teachers and institutional representatives and their organisations that are consulted on education issues. It is important that the EU’s internal structures create sustainable and representative stakeholder engagement structures to govern its educational initiatives. 

ESU believes that large programmes that profoundly affect students, such as the Erasmus+ programme, should be co-governed by educational stakeholders. Not only for the sake of democracy but to ensure the quality of the programmes. Educational stakeholders have a vested interest in creating the most responsible policies for those they represent. The European Union needs access to the information that stakeholder organisations have at their disposal. 

In stakeholders’ involvement and inclusion in the Working Groups, the European Commission shall include all the democratic, representative voices, and allow space for constructive dialogue and open criticism. 

Being education a supportive competence of the EU, the current activism of the Commission needs and has the consent of the Member States via the EU Council to the point of affirming the Member States ‘ownership of the process’. However, this intergovernmental framework needs democratic and stakeholder accountability, both at the national and the European level, which is currently lacking in the EEA governance framework: involvement of national and European Parliaments and of democratic and representative stakeholders, at the national and European level, in the design and implementation of the policies, is essential for their success. As regards stakeholder involvement, the Bologna Process is the benchmark at the European level. In the EEA, however, stakeholder participation is far away from reaching the standards set in the Bologna Process. Adding stakeholders as full members in the High Level Group on Education and Training would be the minimum threshold for considering EEA a participatory process. 

On that, ESU recalls its two decades of representativeness of all HE students within the Bologna Process and expects to play a similar role within the EEA. Similar stakeholder involvement structures must be established at the national level, involving student unions and their democratically elected representatives. Furthermore, EU-sponsored long term HE cooperations, such as the European Universities, must have a governance structure which must comply with the standards of stakeholder democratic representation that are common at the national level, and the EU institutions should have an active role in ensuring that.

The use of research 

The EU should, in every interaction with research, support, encourage and welcome free, academic and rigorous research and policy debate. The EU and its different institutions must strive for a balanced, comprehensive, and as impartial as possible use of studies, research and reports to reflect the multiple dimensions of policy-making and its effects. Only with academic freedom can research contribute to local communities and society at large. The potential for free and accessible research must always prevail over needs imposed by the market. 

Understanding the real challenges that societies face and constantly inspiring, and getting inspired by, the community it belongs to is a key function of research. Free, independent and meaningful research is a core value of democracy. Therefore, it is a public good and its results should belong to the society, making collectively supported research a common good. The EU should always encourage a broad public discussion including different perspectives and be clear about its own political goals and not push a hidden agenda. Especially as a large funder of research on higher education, it is important that the EU appreciates the value of academic, applied and rigorous research and supports the policies of Open Science and open access to research outcomes. It is important that the EU and its Member States recognise the value of academic and artistic freedom and independent research and support their HEIs when engaging with third-country partners, in the spirit of collaboration but with the goal of avoiding foreign interference or distortions of research or collaboration projects by authoritarian countries. In this sense, valuing academic and artistic freedom also requires drawing effective and reasonable consequences early on when partner countries and institutions attack those values. 

Involvement with the Council of Europe 

ESU acknowledges the crucial role that the Council of Europe plays in advocating for Human Rights and democratic citizenship, bringing forward the values of social inclusion. The cooperation between ESU and the Council of Europe is of fundamental importance, and should fruitfully continue, not only working together for inclusion and human rights but also enforcing the reality of European cooperation that goes beyond the EU. 

The Council of Europe’s approach to non-formal learning and European cooperation, among other elements, are in line with ESU’s vision and core values. The approaches and visions shared with ESU include protection and promotion of Human Rights, working to ensure social rights and protecting national minorities; this, in turn, promotes quality education for all. Therefore, we highly value the participation of the Council of Europe in multilateral agreements on higher education in Europe. 

The interrelation between the different higher education cooperation frameworks

The European Higher Education Area and the European Education Area 

The European Students’ Union believes that the future of education in Europe lies in an integrated European Higher Education Area, where fundamental values, automatic recognition of degrees, upward convergence of student rights and democratic and effective student representation on all levels (from local to European and transnational) are practised. To this end, the European Education Area can help in enabling the processes to remove the obstacles to further integration, but the measures to achieve that need to be designed and implemented with the thorough involvement of all the stakeholders – including students – and need to be available for all the Higher Education Institutions operating in the Area. ESU believes that the EHEA and the Bologna Process should remain the main policy-making forum for higher education in Europe. While the EEA can experiment with solutions that can be later discussed, adopted and implemented at the EHEA level, the EU shall not pre-empt debates within the EEA nor create an accomplished fact through their decisions and measures, which would lead to the non-EU EHEA states later on being forced into adopting EEA measures in the sense of a ‘take it or leave it choice’. This risk is also worth considering because the EEA has defined higher education as part of its soft power geopolitical strategy. In order to avoid any conflicts or overlaps of work, coordination between the two education areas is crucial. To avoid overlaps in policy-making as well as unilateral actions in the decision-taking regarding the European harmonisation of higher education by the EU, debates and decisions of the EEA must be taken to the EHEA level to be ratified there.

Bologna in the global dimension 

EHEA is facing a continuing economic and social crisis, unemployment, increasing marginalisation of certain groups, demographic changes, obstacles to freedom of movement as well as conflicts within and between countries, resulting in oppression and injustice as well as violation of human rights. On the other hand, greater mobility of students and staff, not only in Europe but also beyond, fosters mutual understanding and pursuing common EHEA goals. While other regions do and can contribute to further EHEA development through their own policy and practice experience, the original vision and structure of the cooperation have to be revised. 

ESU believes that the cooperation and policy dialogue between the EHEA and regional higher education networks and cooperations beyond Europe need to be continued and strengthened. It is important that this is done by taking into account that the diverse higher education, as well as political, economic and cultural systems of different regions and countries, require applying diverse tools, including pilot projects and peer learning activities between the Bologna Policy Fora. All the initiatives must involve all stakeholders, especially students from all the regions represented. For the benefit of all, the discussion must not be Europe driven, but applying the experience- and learning-oriented approach should allow for information exchange that will lead to mutual understanding and cooperation. To this end, student cooperation with continental student unions within the Global Student Forum is paramount for a shared understanding of what such global cooperation could look like. At the same time, it is important to support regional UNESCO recognition conventions as well as the ratification of the UNESCO Global Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications concerning Higher Education to lay the basis of interregional and global higher education cooperation. 

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download the Policy Paper

The post BM82 – ESU’S vision on European Higher Education policies appeared first on European Students' Union.

Gender mainstreaming can be described as a strategy towards realising gender equity. Fighting for gender equity means that we must recognise existing gender inequalities. Gender inequity disproportionately affects members of society that fall outside the cisgendered male identity, as that identity is seen as the norm and institutions and systems are tailored towards that “norm”. ESU maintains that there are in fact many gender identities and they should be recognised.

ESU’s Gender Mainstreaming Strategy is a framework for gender equity and therefore for all types of actions taken in ESU or by ESU. This Strategy must be used as a guideline for the daily work and policy development of ESU. Therefore, it has to be considered when adopting the plan of work and be in accordance with all statutory documents and regulations, and vice versa.

ESU commits to prioritising intersectionality in its work, recognising the way that issues influence people differently due to their race, ethnicity, cultural and economic background, sexual orientation, disability, genders, chronic illness, neurotype or mental health status, etc. It is therefore imperative to strive for equity and not just equality. Due to the various intersections of these identities and therefore lived experiences the obstacles an individual faces to reach a goal cannot be mitigated by a single mechanism but must take into account the additional burdens placed on an individual and alleviating those to even achieve the possibility of equal opportunities.

Why does ESU need a gender mainstreaming strategy?

Gender equity is a core value of ESU. Higher education does not take place in a closed space. On the contrary, it is a fundamental part of a society and social mechanisms of discrimination are also reproduced here. Therefore, the fight against discrimination is a core task of the student movement. A human rights-based approach and democratic principles can only be realised with gender equity.

ESU represents over 20 million students through its members, and it is of utmost importance for ESU to take responsibility by advocating for gender equity and implementing policy towards this goal. ESU believes gender is a social construction created from various cultural, political, social, and psychological factors. This construct revolves around the roles that are seen as ideal or appropriate behaviour for a person of a specific assigned sex or assumed gender. 

Increased attention to gender equity issues will improve the lives of all students. In a democratic society based on principles of social justice, each individual member has the right to the best quality of life possible. Gender mainstreaming initiatives seek to further this objective because by increasing attention to gender equity issues in ESU, NUSes gain networks and support to lobby these issues in their own country and improve the lives of students there. Due to the patriarchal structures of society being imbued in any institutions, people are not aware of the built-in sexism and the harm and dangers it causes an individual, including a students’ access to education, and ESU has the responsibility to make all students’ lives better and tackle the specific barriers that students outside the cis-male identity face.

Gender equity is not an isolated issue and therefore the effects of working on gender equity are manifold. Gender equity cannot exist without LGBTQI+ liberation, racial justice, disability justice and all other forms of justice as our liberation is inherently interconnected. While working towards gender equity ESU reassures its commitment to defending a person’s inalienable rights from any infringements.  Continuous work on gender equity benefits the internal knowledge and working environment. It further sensitises members on the impacts of gender inequity and enables joint work tackling discrimination.

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download

The post Revision of the Gender Mainstreaming Strategy appeared first on European Students' Union.

ESU believes that the quality of higher education should be one of the highest priorities in the debates within the European higher education society, as well as it should be accessible and enhanced at the institutional and programme level  to ensure the best possible conditions for the entrance and completion of higher education.

Sadly, the concept of excellence in higher education is often misused to refer to so called ‘elite’ programmes and centres, which focus on a small number of individuals perceived as talented and institutions regarded as of high quality or prestigious. ESU believes that an open knowledge-based society will not be established with this concept of excellence that can only be achieved through stronger competition, but should be based on cooperation of all stakeholders, ensuring them equal conditions in access to any resources.

Every student should have the possibility to completely utilise their own intellectual potential without being limited by restrictive learning programs. ESU opposes any educational system which separates different levels of perceived talents within higher education. We stress the fact that all students should be able to be academically uplifted from the position they find themselves in.

The following policy paper consists of ESU’s position on what is being considered as high quality education from students’ perspective, taking into account the core element of education related to the delivery of learning and teaching, methodologies and its organisation, through the supporting agendas and tools set within the political framework of the Bologna Process and the established and system of Quality Assurance across the European Higher Education Area.

2021 Policy Paper on Quality of HE available here.

The post BM81 Policy Paper on Quality of Higher Education – 2021 appeared first on European Students' Union.

We, the students of Europe, hold these universal rights to be unconcealed, self-evident and inalienable.

We believe that education is a human right, not a privilege and indispensable for the advancement of other human rights, that students are equal partners in education, and that education has a societal, personal, cultural and economic objective as well as a purpose in and of itself. Every student is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Charter, free from any form of discrimination, including, but not limited to discrimination on the basis of political conviction, religion, race, ethnic or cultural origin, sex, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, age, socio-economic standing or any disability they may have. Every student is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Charter without regard to their field, mode or level of study or methods of programme delivery. 

The rights laid down in this Charter stem from the fundamental human right to education. These rights apply for all domains and ought to be implemented at all levels of student involvement within Higher Education, included within permanent and structured alliances of Higher Education Institutions with decision and policy making powers.

In this document, “students” refers to all those enrolled in Higher Education, and “access” in Higher Education refers to both physical and digital access that should be guaranteed independently of each other.

1 – Social Dimension of Higher Education

1. Everyone has the right to enrol in Higher Education.
2. All students have the right to full and equal participation in Higher Education, free from discrimination.
3. All students have the right to equal usage of Higher Education facilities.
4. All students have the right to conduct their studies with sufficient public financial support.
5. Everyone has the right to apply to any Higher Education institution without any form of financial or bureaucratic restrictions.
6. All students have the right to affordable quality and suitable housing.
7. All students have the right to affordable, nutritious and sustainable food.
8. All students have the right to access affordable and quality living necessities (including but not limited to transportation, technical support and essential goods such as hygiene products).
9. All students have the right to free and adequate mechanisms in place to support their physical and mental wellbeing.
10. All students have the right to have access to quality healthcare and psychological counselling free of charge. 
11. All students have the right to physically and digitally access Higher Education and social spaces regardless of physical and mental disposition and any disability they may have. 
12. All students have the right to have their physical and/or mental disabilities taken into account and to receive sufficient support when attending classes or being evaluated. 
13. All students have the right to free access to all relevant educational resources.
14. All students have the right to attend social, cultural and recreational events, void of socio-economic barriers.
15. All students have the right to equal participation in Higher Education that does not interfere with their religious practices (including but not limited to lecture, seminar and exam timetabling).
16. All students with refugee and minority backgrounds have the right to full access, academic inclusion, participation and completion of Higher Education. For those students with minoritised native languages, this includes having no barriers to participate in Higher Education in their native language. 
17. All students have the right to self-express as an individual or as a group void of administrative and/or bureaucratic barriers, censorship or discrimination.
18. All students have the right to participate in Higher Education spaces with institutional staff who have undergone necessary training pertaining to non-discrimination and mental health wellbeing.
19. All students have the right to a free and fair appeal to an independent representative body against any act which they consider to be discriminatory.
20. All students have the right to independent and impartial advice regarding their access and participation in Higher Education through institutional, regional and/or national Student Ombud or similar solutions.

2 – Public responsibility, Institutional Autonomy and Academic Freedom

1. Everyone has the right to inclusive quality education free of charge
2. All students have the right to study at Higher Education Institutions that are fully funded. 
3. All students have the right to pursue their study programs regardless of financial burdens created for the Higher Education Institution or government. 
4. All the students have the right to Higher Education free of commodification and independent from the labour market.
5. All students have the right to structural assurance to begin, progress through and complete their educational programme. 
6. All students have the right to protection of their academic freedom, students` rights and academic integrity. 
7. All students have the right to express their thoughts about their Higher Education process, Higher Education Institutions or any matter of students` interest, without fear of persecution. 
8. All students have the right to partake autonomously as full members with all responsibilities and privileges, in Higher Education governing structures, decision making, implementation, and assessment processes for learning, teaching and research as well as for support services. 
9. All students have the right to pursue their research, teaching, and learning autonomously and use their Higher Education Institutions facilities accordingly.
10. All students have the right to free access to relevant information and sources in accordance with the stipulations laid out by the Open Science Movement.
11. All students have the right to transparent Higher Education and study programs, both in the national and international context.
12. All students have the right to the proper protection of their personal data and information.
13. All students have the right to connected/coherent prior and Higher Education.
14. All students have the right to a healthy living, studying and working environment supporting physical and mental wellbeing.
15. All students have the right to mobilise peacefully regarding issues inside or outside of the academic institutions without fear of any form of repercussions pertaining to their education.
16.  All students have the right to participate in the sustainability movement, climate change mitigation and environmental defence.
17. All students have the right to gain education on the climate and ecological crises. 
18. All students have the right to environmentally friendly and sustainable education and education institutions.

3 – Internationalisation and Mobility

1. All students have the right to partake in a physical mobility period regardless of their socio-economical background.  
2. Every student has the right to full funding of their international mobility period. 
3. All students have the right to have one’s cultural background recognised and respected. 
4. All students have the right to move freely outside their host university
5. All students have the right to gain intercultural competencies as part of their education during their course of studies.
6. All students have the right to a fair, costless, easy, non-bureaucratic and timely assessment and recognition process of the qualifications (formal, non-formal and informal) earned in another country.
7. All students have the right to the recognition of competencies acquired abroad for continuing education or entering the labour market in a timely and transparent way.
8.  All international students have the right to a supportive environment enhancing quality internationalised education on all levels. 
9. International and mobile students have the right to participate in student representation and student activities to the same extent as local students. 
10. All students have the right to participate in all of the activities, local, national and international, at the HE institution/s they are attending abroad.
11.  International Students have the right to organise autonomously and represent themselves and receive sufficient support for these objectives.  
12.  Democratic student organisations have the right to collaborate with their counterparts in other campuses, countries, and continents.

4 – Quality Education 

1. All students have the right to be evaluated or graded solely on their academic performance as part of their academic programme.
2. All students have the right to learning, teaching and internship environments that support and encourage the development of autonomous learning, critical thinking and personal growth.
3. All students have the right to receive constructive feedback on their academic activities and performance. 
4. All students have the right to participate, as equal partners, in the continuous assessment and improvement of their study programmes and institutions.
5. All students have the right to a flexible and customisable study program.
6. All students have the right to diverse teaching and evaluation methods aligned with their learning objectives. 
7. All students have the right to have access to adequately paid and compensated curricular and extracurricular traineeship and internship without any type of discrimination. These traineeship and internship opportunities must also provide all students with a positive work environment.
8. All students have the right to continuously reviewed, assessed, updated and developed programmes. 
9. All students have the right to free access to comprehensive and objective information on the quality of the programme and institution in which they wish to study or are already studying. 
10. All students have the right to transparent and well-communicated Quality Assurance processes and institutions. 
11. All students have the right to the protection of their intellectual property.
12. All students have the right to quality didactic and pedagogical teaching.     
13. All students have the right to fair recognition of comparable qualifications as well as to free and fair recognition of informal and prior learning.
14. All students have the right to fair and free recognition of their academic work.
15. All students have the right to free and timely access to their academic situation and to the release of their diplomas and other documents regarding their status.
16. All students have the right to have the grading of their academic work re-evaluated by an external examiner.
17. All students have the right to a free and fair appeal against any decision related to their studies to an independent body. 
18. All students have the right to gain practical knowledge directly related to the labour market; this includes the right to vocational counselling.
19. All students have the right to quality extracurricular opportunities that allow for learning beyond the confines of the curriculum.
20. All students have the right to have their prior learning, including formal, non-formal and informal competencies recognised through Diploma Supplement free of charge by their Higher Education Institution and under national legislation.

 5 – Student Involvement

1. All students have the right to organise autonomously.
2. All students have the right (directly or through democratic representation) to co-governance in all decision preparatory commissions and decision-making bodies relevant to their education. Students must not suffer academic, financial or politically motivated legal consequences stemming from such involvement.
3. All students have the right to run and be elected as student’s representatives to participate in the work, policy-making, and decision-making process of different Higher Education institutions or other relevant stakeholders in Higher Education. Student representatives should be elected, replaced, and dismissed only by students.
4. All students have the right to have their opinion considered as that of all stakeholders on equal footing in Higher Education.
5. All student organizations have the right to freely express themselves and this should not be limited to academic matters.
6. Students have the right to be informed about all Higher Education affairs in a transparent manner.
7. All organisations representing students have the right to be recognised, financially supported, provided dedicated spaces by their Higher Education Institutions. 
8. All students have the right to be represented themselves by democratically elected representatives at all levels of governance.

Student Right Charter in PDF

The post BM80: Student Rights Charter appeared first on European Students' Union.

This document presents the very first ESU policy paper on mental health of students and will be used for any advocacy work done in the area of mental health, within and outside of higher education. Through active work for a more inclusive and stigma-free environment, higher education can set an example to society on how to tackle a deeply rooted mental health stigma, leading to a much-needed change in our world. 

Download the 2020 Mental Health Charter here.

The post 2020 Mental Health Charter appeared first on European Students' Union.

The strategy outlines our strategic priorities within the broader area perpetuating human rights. It is important to understand that all the priorities should be viewed as equal. With this strategy, we hope to consolidate our current work that has been centred around the Students’ Rights Charter. Much of this work has been realised through solidarity statements and partnerships with European institutions such as the Council of Europe and the European Union. Some priorities are directly action-orientated, while others are more closely related to our way of conducting work.

This Policy Paper was adopted at the European Students’ Union Board Meeting 77 in Malta, in December 2019.

The post 2019 Human Rights and Solidarity Strategy appeared first on European Students' Union.