EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT STRUCTURAL AND COHESION POLICIES B Agriculture and Rural Development Culture and Education Fisheries Regional Development Transport and Tourism EN DE FR DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT B: STRUCTURAL AND COHESION POLICIES CULTURE AND EDUCATION HIGHER EDUCATION ENTRANCE QUALIFICATIONS AND EXAMS IN EUROPE: A COMPARISON STUDY This document was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Culture and Education. AUTHORS Cecile Hoareau McGrath, Marie Louise Henham, Anne Corbett, Niccolo Durazzi, Michael Frearson, Barbara Janta, Bregtje W. Kamphuis, Eriko Katashiro, Nina Brankovic, Benoit Guerin, Catriona Manville, Inga Schwartz, Daniel Schweppenstedde RESPONSIBLE ADMINISTRATOR Markus J. Prutsch Policy Department B: Structural and Cohesion Policies European Parliament B-1047 Brussels E-mail: [email protected] EDITORIAL ASSISTANCE Lyna Pärt LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN Translation: DE, FR ABOUT THE PUBLISHER To contact the Policy Department or to subscribe to its monthly newsletter please write to: [email protected] Manuscript completed in May 2014 Brussels © European Union, 2014 This document is available on the Internet at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/studies DISCLAIMER The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorized, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy. DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT B: STRUCTURAL AND COHESION POLICIES CULTURE AND EDUCATION HIGHER EDUCATION ENTRANCE QUALIFICATIONS AND EXAMS IN EUROPE: A COMPARISON STUDY Abstract The study analyses admission systems to higher education across ten countries, covering some countries of the European Union (France, Germany, Italy, Slovenia, Sweden and the United Kingdom), a candidate country (Turkey) as well as commonly used international comparators (Australia, Japan and the US). These countries are compared on three axes: the equity of admissions, their quality and their ability to encourage students’ mobility. On this basis, recommendations are provided with regard to admission to higher education in Europe. IP/B/CULT/IC/2013_007 May 2014 PE 529.057 EN Higher Education Entrance Qualifications and Exams in Europe: A Comparison __________________________________________________________________________________________ CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES 5 LIST OF FIGURES 6 LIST OF BOXES 6 GLOSSARY OF TERMS 7 PREFACE 9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 11 1. INTRODUCTION 15 1.1.Worldwide trends influencing admissions 15 1.2.Policy context 16 1.3.The history of EU intervention in higher education 17 1.4.Key questions 19 1.5.Descriptive questions 20 1.6.Evaluative questions 20 2. METHOD 25 2.1.Statistical overview 25 2.2.Case study comparison 27 2.3.Benchmarking of countries 28 2.4.Stakeholders’ interviews 33 2.5.Review of policy and national sources 33 3. VARIETY OF ADMISSION SYSTEMS: AN OVERVIEW 35 3.1.Entry Requirements 35 3.2.Content of secondary school exams 40 3.3.Variation within national systems 42 3.4.Actors 45 3.5.The age of entry into higher education 49 3.6.Timeframe of application 51 3.7.The cost of application to higher education 52 3.8.Summary 53 3 Policy Department B: Structural and Cohesion Policies __________________________________________________________________________________________ 4. THE EQUITY OF ADMISSIONS SYSTEMS 55 4.1.Strengths and weaknesses of each system in terms of equity 55 4.2.Admission systems and socio-economic inequalities 57 4.3.Admission systems and specific groups of learners 62 4.4.Summary 66 5. THE QUALITY OF ADMISSIONS SYSTEMS 67 5.1.Strengths and weaknesses of each system in terms of quality 67 5.2.The relationship between management of admissions and quality 70 5.3.Admission systems as reliable predictors of students’ achievements 72 5.4.Timing of applications 74 5.5.Summary 74 6. ENABLING MOBILITY THROUGH ADMISSIONS SYSTEMS 77 6.1.Strengths and weaknesses of each system in terms of mobility 78 6.2.Trends in inbound and outbound mobility 80 6.3.Admissions as a regulating mechanism 82 6.4.The absence of European-wide coordination initiatives 83 6.5.International comparisons on the coordination of admissions 85 6.6.Summary 87 7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 89 7.1.Conclusions 89 7.2.Recommendations for European institutions 90 7.3.Recommendations for Member States 94 7.4.Issues for further research 95 BIBLIOGRAPHY 97 ANNEXES 115 4 Higher Education Entrance Qualifications and Exams in Europe: A Comparison __________________________________________________________________________________________ LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 International comparision 29 TABLE 2 Overview of regulatory schemes in country case studies 32 TABLE 3 Summary of entry requirements 36 TABLE 4 Role of higher education institutions in the selection of students, selection criteria and management of applications 45 TABLE 5 Bodies managing admissions 47 TABLE 6 Average and typical age of entry to higher education 50 TABLE 7 Application, administrative, and other fees 53 TABLE 8 Strengths and weaknesses of each system in terms of equity 56 TABLE 9 Comparison between system characteristics and indicators related to access and attainment 58 TABLE 10 An overview of measures adopted towards disabled students across the 10 case studies 65 TABLE 11 Strengths and weaknesses of admission systems in terms of quality 68 TABLE 12 Strengths and weaknesses of admission systems regarding mobility 78 TABLE 13 Inbound mobility 80 TABLE 14 Outbound mobility ratio 81 TABLE 15 List of admission agencies 92 5 Policy Department B: Structural and Cohesion Policies __________________________________________________________________________________________ LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1 Three stages of the study 20 FIGURE 2 International overview 27 FIGURE 3 Admissions system in Germany 87 FIGURE 4 A suggested information portal and support service for higher education admissions in Europe 93 LIST OF BOXES BOX 1 Secondary school leaving certificates with varying degree of choice: England and Slovenia 41 BOX 2 Standardised tests in addition to school leaving certificate 42 BOX 3 Centralised and dual admissions systems: case study country examples 49 6 Higher Education Entrance Qualifications and Exams in Europe: A Comparison __________________________________________________________________________________________ GLOSSARY OF TERMS Admission is defined as a ‘specific activity undertaken to admit students to universities’ for the purpose of this study (Matross Helms, 2008: 2). This definition is narrower than definitions provided elsewhere, which included for instance: ‘the process from when a potential student develops an interest in entry to higher education until enrolment in a particular institution and course takes place’ (Harman, 1994: 318). Considerations related to admissions in this study include entry qualifications and examinations, application procedures (e.g. length), and the regulation of such entry criteria to higher education. The study does not cover certain broader factors such as the drivers of the choice of students regarding particular higher education institutions and disciplines, e.g. rankings (Horstschraeer, 2012). This study concentrates on admissions to undergraduate education in universities and academic degrees, and excludes admissions in postgraduate education, short degrees or more vocational routes. An open admission system exists when holders of relevant secondary school certificates have an automatic right of access to higher education (Sargent et al., 2012: 24). A selective admission system is a system where applicants have to meet other criteria in addition to holding a secondary school certificate to be admitted to higher education institutions (Sargent et al., 2012: 24). Inbound mobility rate is the number of students from abroad studying in a given country, expressed as a percentage of total tertiary enrolment in that country (UNESCO, 2012). Outbound mobility ratio is the number of students from a given country studying abroad, expressed as a percentage of total tertiary enrolment in that country (UNESCO, 2012). Qualifications include any diploma or other certificate issued by a competent authority attesting the successful completion of an education programme and giving the holder of the qualification the right to be considered for admission to higher education, according to the Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications concerning Higher Education. Access to higher education refers to the opportunity to enter higher education, though is not a guarantee for admission. The principles of inherited merit, equality of rights and equality of opportunity have been used to frame access policies according to Clancy and Goastellec (2007: 137-38). Access includes two categories of students: those who enter higher education for the first time (‘new entrants’); and those who use the facilities of higher education (‘enrolled students’) regardless of how many years they have already spent in higher education (Keiser et and O’Heron, 2005: 17). This study concentrates on new entrants to an undergraduate level/first cycle of higher education. Where admission practice is restrictive or selective, the distinction needs to be made between conditions for access, and conditions for admission