CC BY
26
UNIVERSITIES AS LIFELONG LEARNING PROVIDERS IN LATVIA
I. Luka,
I. Lismane
A wish to learn and improve one’s knowledge and competences is part of Latvian traditions. The popular Latvian proverb ‘Live and learn’ means: the longer we live, the more we learn, the more experienced we become. In Europe, the term lifelong learning became one of the key success milestones already in 2000 by giving it momentum and overarching status by Memorandum on lifelong learning. In Latvia, despite numerous discussions, the term lifelong learning (LLL) is comparatively new. In Latvia the LLL concept became topical after regaining its independence and joining the EU in 2004. At national level, in 2006 National Strategy for Lifelong Learning and in 2008 its implementation programme were adopted. The Strategy since then has become the main national policy planning document on LLL. It was revised and updated in 2009. The Strategy determines the long-term target for LLL: “to ensure education throughout the whole life according to the interests of inhabitants, as well as their abilities and socially economic development needs of the particular region” (Basic guidelines for lifelong learning 2007-2013, 2006:8).
Lifelong learning is a comprehensive concept that includes formal, nonformal, informal learning and helps attaining one’s individual, institutional and professional aims. According to Eneroth (2008) these are three different worlds underlying the three different kinds of learning situations: 1) the formal learning situations - the world of generalisations; 2) the non-formal learning situations - the world of individualities; 3) the informal learning situations - the world of incidents. All of them form the new LLL paradigm.
Universities have a special mission in providing LLL. Nowadays, university has become “a key element of the innovation system both as human capital provider and seedbed of new firms” (Etzkowitz, et al., 2000:315). Changes in the social and economic spheres have brought changes to the role of university. The focus has shifted from a university as a research centre to the implementer of public objectives within the LLL context (Rubene, 2004). Globalisation is the major drive for change within higher education (HE) (Bourn, 2011) that plays “a critical role in assisting change towards a sustainable present and future within our society” (Junyent, Geli de Ciurana, 2008:764). Since the 19th century universities have been implementing the role of helping to develop regions (Doyle, 2010). According to Nemeth (2010:452), nowadays HE has 3 strategic dimensions in developing LLL: 1) the development of the quality and efficiency of the education and training systems; 2) the development of opportunities and access to the education and training systems by developing learning cities and regions; 3) HE must be open and act as a partner in local and regional partnerships to develop communities.
319
In accordance with the Bologna Process the system of HE in Latvia comprises three cycles of higher education programmes: Bachelor, Master and Doctor’s level providing academic higher education and professional higher education. In 2012/2013 there were 58 higher education institutions (HEIs) in Latvia: 6 universities, 11 state financed HEIs, 17 state financed colleges, 16 HEIs established by legal persons, 8 colleges established by legal persons. Universities and colleges implement academic and professional higher education programmes as well as scientific activities, research and artistic creativeness. At present Latvia is on the second phase of referencing its education system to the European Qualifications Framework (EQF) in which education is classified into 8 education levels. The Cabinet of Ministers (CoM) made amendments to the CoM Regulations of 2 December 2008 No.990 “Regulations on the Classification of Latvian Education”. The adopted CoM Regulations No.931 “Regulations on the Classification of Latvian Education” on 5 October 2010 deals with the comparison of the system of education of Latvia with ISCED and EQF levels. These Regulations also compare the 8 EQF levels and 6 ISCED levels (International Standard Classification of Education) which are used to facilitate comparisons of education statistics and indicators across countries on the basis of uniform and internationally agreed definitions. Colleges offer the 1 level higher education (EQF Level 5). Universities offer higher education of EQF Level 6 (BA, BSc), Level 7 (MA, MSc) and Level 8 (Doctor’s degree programmes). Since Latvia uses ISCED system, the education system of Latvia can be understood and measured internationally. HEIs have certain advantages in implementing LLL which are characterised by highly qualified academic staff with corresponding knowledge and competence, experienced in e-learning, good library resources, etc.
In Latvia, there is a territorially well organised network of HEIs which has to be used more for ensuring LLL in different ways and forms. The number of branches of HEIs is increasing which positively influences accessibility to adult education. However, more effort has to be made in increasing the leading role of HEIs in the LLL system. HEIs have to more widely offer people an opportunity to acquire separate courses using the status of external students. At present, alongside with Bachelor, Master and Doctoral studies, HEIs offer non-formal education programmes for adults. This is done in specially established departments - continuing education departments or lifelong learning departments/centres that coordinate the design of programmes, enrolment of learners and programme implementation. These activities have to be strengthened. Some HEIs offer adults to acquire certain courses of Bachelor or Master programmes and having completed formalities and passed an examination/final test, learners are issued a certificate. The status of external student gives a possibility disregarding age and previous professional qualification to acquire knowledge and skills required in the labour market.
The offer of LLL largely depends on demand. The data of the Ministry of Education and Science show that in the study year 2012/2013 there were 94 474 students studying at HEIs in Latvia: 77 123 students (82%) studying in graduate studies (EQF Level 5 and 6), 17 351 students (18%) in post-graduate studies (EQF Level 7 and 8). The statistics on the thematic fields of higher education programmes show that social sciences continue to be the most popular study fields
320
in higher education. In social sciences, the most popular programmes are EQF Level 6 programmes in communication sciences (1 182 students) and law (4 038 students). In humanities, the most popular programmes are EQF Level 6 programmes in philology (2 159 students, 1 085 of them study English philology). In nature sciences, mathematics and IT, the most popular programmes belong to the field of IT: 678 students at EQF Level 5, 2 999 students at EQF Level 6, 608 students at EQF Level 7, and 71 students in Doctoral programmes. In the fields of engineering, production and construction, it is difficult to determine the most popular programmes. This can be explained by the fact that engineering sciences have been given priority as to the state financing and subsidised tuition fee and scholarships for students. The students choose the branch of engineering also taking into consideration the number of the available state subsidised places. Most of these programmes are offered by Riga Technical University. It has to be marked that at EQF Level 5 and 6 studies 69% of programmes are implemented by state and 31% by private education institutions, whereas the share at EQF Level 7 and 8 is 83%:17%. Most private HEIs offer study programmes in social sciences.
In order to attain the target of the strategic document “Europe 2020” - to promote competitiveness and employment in general and in every Member State, the EU has defined benchmarks to be attained by 2020 (ET 2020, 2009). One of them is - the share of 30-34 year olds with tertiary educational attainment should be at least 40%. Although Latvia has a comparatively high number of students compared to the EU average, Latvia has set the target of attaining 34-36% only. According to the Eurostat data in 2012, the number reached 36.5% in Latvia and 35.5% on average in the EU. Thus, Latvia has already attained its target and can strive for the EU target. Another benchmark is - by 2020 at least 15% of adults (aged 25-64) should participate in LLL. Although several measures were taken in Latvia to support the engagement of adult learners in LLL, in 2011, only 5.0% of adults were engaged in LLL, compared to 8.9% on average in the EU. HEIs must strengthen their activities to provide education services to different target groups of adults to attain this goal thus also contributing to the development of “a successful education system built on four pillows: learning to know, learning to do, learning to be, and learning to live together1’ (Carneiro, Draxler, 2008:149). This can be done by organizing non-formal education programmes for adults, both at HEIs and workplace, simultaneously providing solutions for local and global problems in the LLL context.
The key issue of HE in Latvia is the quality. The country has planned to improve the education quality by implementing a significant reform in assessing the quality of HE passing from accreditation of study programmes to accreditation of study branches. However, the process did not give the expected results as there had been many problems in the implementation of the accreditation process and now the country is facing another try by involving foreign experts in accreditation of all study branches. One of the assessment criteria is the involvement of alumni in continuing education thus ensuring continuity of education and training in the LLL context.
To sum up, European University Association (2003) has pointed out that HE should recognize important dimensions of LLL leading to strategic changes: 1) HE has to play a key role in creating a scientific framework and discussion forum for
321
adult and continuing education through LLL initiatives; 2) HEIs must be involved in consultations on developing and updating LLL strategies; 3) the innovative potential of HE must be considered; 4) LLL has to be included in HEIs strategies and mission; 5) HEIs have to involve stakeholders in the discussions on creating a better learning climate; 6) adult and continuous education has to be recognized with the same scientific respect as other subject areas of education and research.
Although certain actions have been implemented in this direction, these tasks remain on agenda for Latvia in the near future as well.
References
1. Bourn, D. (2011) From internationalisation to global perspectives. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(5), 559-571.
2. Carneiro, R., Draxler, A. (2008) Education for the 21st Century: lessons and challenges. European Journal of Education, 43(2), 149-160.
3. Doyle, L. (2010) The Role of Universities in the ‘Cultural Health' of their Regions: universities' and regions' understandings of cultural engagement. European Journal of Education, 45(3), 466-480.
4. Eneroth, B. (2008) Knowledge, Dentience and Receptivity: a paradigm of lifelong learning. European Journal of Education, 43(2), 229-240.
5. Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, et al. (2000) The Future of the University and the University of the Future: Evolution of Ivory Tower to Entrepreneurial Paradigm. Research Policy, 29, 313-330.
6. European University Association. (2003) Trends 2003. Geneva-Brussels, EUA.
7. Junyent, M., Geli de Ciurana, A.M. (2008) Education for sustainability in university studies: a model for reviewing the curriculum. British Educational Research Journal, 34(6), 763-782.
8. Nemeth, B. (2010) The Accelerating Roles of Higher Education in Regions through the European Lifelong Learning Initiative. European Journal of Education, 45(3), 451-465.
9. Rubene, Z. (2004) Sapere aude! Critical thinking in University Studies in Latvia, Riga: LU Akademiskais apgads.
10. ET 2020. (2009) Council conclusions of 12 May 2009 on a strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training (‘ET 2020'), Official Journal of the EU (2009/C 119/02).
322
