{"id":3513,"date":"2018-01-29T00:57:36","date_gmt":"2018-01-28T21:57:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.mbirekul.com\/?p=3513"},"modified":"2018-01-29T00:57:36","modified_gmt":"2018-01-28T21:57:36","slug":"3513","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.mbirekul.com\/?p=3513","title":{"rendered":"E-Activity and Technology in a Changing Environment"},"content":{"rendered":"

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/strong>
\n 41<\/strong>
\nE-Activity and Technology in a Changing Environment<\/strong>
\n Gerhard Berchtold<\/strong>
\nUniversidad Azteca, Chalco (Mexico)<\/p>\n

Introduction<\/strong>
\nThe second half of the last century will go down in the history of higher education as the period of its most
\nspectacular expansion: an over sixfold increase in student enrolments worldwide, from 13 million in 1960 to
\n82 million in 1995. But it is also the period which has seen the gap between industrially developed, the
\ndeveloping countries and in particular the least developed countries with regard to access and resources for
\nhigher learning and research, already enormous, becoming even wider.1 Berchtold2 provides estimates that
\nby 2050 the worldwide student number will increase to 185 million. This changing higher education
\nenvironment requires e-activity and technology to cope with the provision of education on a global scale.
\nGlobality is an unavoidable challenge of contemporary life. The process comprises, as Saavedra
\nHidalgo and Berchtold3 outline, all aspects of contemporary social life, where the economy, politics, culture,
\nreflected in social consciousness, the way people think about the world, both its local world as well as the
\nwhole world is undergoing considerable change. Regarding the effects of globalisation on education, two
\nphenomena are manifested contrasting: On the one hand, the education sector itself is characterized by
\nstrong inertia. On the other hand the transformation of the sectors of finance, transport, production, trade
\nessentially because of the (stock) markets produces effects in the sectors of education in the poorest
\ncountries.
\nDon F. Westerheijden 4 states that the widest possible context for any phenomenon in higher
\neducation, and a buzzword at the same time, is provided by \u2018globalisation\u2019. What meanings can be given to it
\nis a question leading to an almost endless academic debate, which he cut short by focusing on one practical
\nelement of it, namely the policy developments around the World Trade Organisation, focusing on the
\nnegotiations around the General Agreement on Trade in Services. These are bound to have an impact on the
\nway higher education will be behaving around the world in a few years from now\u2014or sooner. The relevant
\nquestion from our point of view then becomes: Is education a service? The answer that should be given to
\nthis question is of the \u2018Yes, but\u2026\u2019 type\u2014the \u2018but\u2019 being that it is debated whether education, and especially
\nhigher education, is a public good that should be exempted from trade perspectives.
\nFriedman5 postulates the world has become flat, arguing that globalised trade, outsourcing, supplychaining,
\nand political forces have changed the world permanently, for both better and worse. He also argues
\nthat the pace of globalisation is quickening and will continue to have a growing impact on business
\norganization and practice. \u201cBecause it is flattening and shrinking the world, \u201cGloblization 3.0\u201d is going to be
\nmore and more driven by not only individuals but also by a much more diverse \u2013 non-Western, non-white \u2013
\n1 World Conference on Higher Education Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century: Vision and Action. 9 October 1998: World<\/em><\/span>
\n Declaration on Higher Education for the Twenty-first Century: Vision and Action<\/em><\/span>
\n 2 Berchtold (2006)<\/em><\/span>
\n 3 Saavedra Hidalgo, R.R., Berchtold G. (2011) M\u00e9xico y la Uni\u00f3n Europea una nueva interacci\u00f3n educativa: Criterios europeos para<\/em><\/span>
\n Evaluar la Calidad en E-learning y la transferencia de cr\u00e9ditos ECTS. \u00c1rea tem\u00e1tica: Iniciativas multilaterales y gubernamentales para la<\/em><\/span>
\n innov@ci\u00f3n en educaci\u00f3n y formaci\u00f3n. Universidad Azteca.<\/em><\/span>
\n 4 (Westerheijden and Leegwater, 2003, 16f)<\/em><\/span>
\n 5 Friedman, 2006, 11<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u00a0<\/i><\/span>
\ngroup of individuals. Individuals from every corner of the flat world are being empowered.\u201d Croucher 6
\nperceives the globalisation process as a combination of economic, technological, sociocultural and political
\nforces. The founder of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab7 sees the world growing together at high
\nspeed, globalisation is driven by technological and scientific innovation, \u201cwe can move data-capital around
\nthe world in seconds\u201d. As John Daniel, a former UNESCO Assistant Director put it: \u201cBut having said that it is
\nvital to recognise that, while higher education may be traded in a marketplace, it is a quite different
\nproposition from cars or bananas. The challenge is to come up with an appropriate way of maximising the
\nbenefits and minimising the dangers now that higher education is a global phenomenon.\u201d 8
\nAccording to Bhagwati 9 globalisation is often used to refer to economic globalisation, that is, integration
\nof national economies into the international economy through trade, foreign direct investment, capital flows,
\nmigration, and the spread of technology. For Noam Chomsky 10 the word globalisation is also used, in a
\ndoctrinal sense, to describe the neoliberal form of economic globalisation. Chomsky asks, how after the
\nvictory of globalised capitalism the society of the future may look like and whose demands it shall serve:
\nthose of the transnational corporations, or those who have been driven aside more and more by the victory of
\na neo-liberal economic order? Will it be possible to develop an international society, comparable in its basics
\nwith the Third World, with islands of power and wealth in a sea of misery, and with totalitarian controlmechanisms
\nbehind an increasingly facial democracy? Or will the resistance of the populations, needing to
\nbecome international as well, be successful enough in order to remove these structures of power and rule?
\nRegarding the current state of globalisation, Diamond suggests reasons both for pessimism and for optimism
\nabout our ability to solve our current environmental problems, or, for the first time in history, we face the risk
\nof a global decline. His remaining cause for hope is another consequence of the globalised modern world\u00b4s
\ninterconnectedness, because we have the media and opportunity to learn from the mistakes of distant
\npeoples and past peoples. 11
\nTwo driving forces – technology and globalisation – have changed the environment of universities
\nworldwide. Technology means information technology development, the internet, e-learning, virtual
\nclassrooms, altogether new challenges for traditional classroom-based higher education settings. In principle,
\nopen and distance higher education in virtual classrooms can serve an unlimited number of students.
\nGlobalisation means both, global competition as global outreach or campus-extension, and global access to
\na virtual university from every corner of the world with an internet-connection.
\nTransnational higher education has developed from correspondence learning, via Radio- and TVcourses,
\ntowards a new age of virtual and e-learning environments, combining advanced open and distance
\nlearning tools and didactic methods with state-of-the-art information technology offering new opportunities for
\nuniversities and higher education providers to go online with their degree programmes and become virtual
\nuniversities and transnational players. Mega universities have developed. The biggest players globally are
\nthe Chinese Radio and TV university, the Turkish Anatolian distance university, the Indian Indira Ghandi
\nNational Open university, the UK Open university, the Spanish National university of distance education, the
\nCatalan Open university, the Portugese Open university, the University of Phoenix online, the University of
\nLiverpool, besides British style validation schemes (e.g. University of Wales) to name but a few. Additionally,
\nnetworks of universities, consortia, and alliances, internet platforms, have developed, taking advantage of
\ncluster solutions and numerous joint marketing websites and click-link-lead ads on the internet. Those are
\n6 Croucher (2004)<\/em><\/span>
\n 7 Aust et.al. 2007, 26<\/em><\/span>
\n 8 John Daniel, Assistant Director-General for Education for UNESCO, Paris, at the First Global Forum on International Quality<\/em><\/span>
\n Assurance, Accreditation and the Recognition of Qualifications in Higher Education \u201cGLOBALISATION AND HIGHER EDUCATION\u201d, on<\/em><\/span>
\n the topic \u201cAUTOMOBILES, BANANAS, COURSES, DEGREES\u2026An ABC of Higher Education and Globalisation\u201d, 17 October 2002.<\/em><\/span>
\n 9 Bhagwati (2004)<\/em><\/span>
\n 10 Noam Chomsky (1994, 2004)<\/em><\/span>
\n 11 Jarred Diamond (2005)<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u00a0<\/i><\/span>
\nquite common among the leading US distance university study offers, as well as in the Spanish speaking
\ncountries, e.g. FUNIBER. New, for-profit providers are increasing their market share of the TNE market, e.g.
\nKaplan universities in the U.S.A. The biggest exporters of TNE globally 12 are the USA, the UK, and Australia.
\nBased on previous findings and new personal research this paper explores the changing environment,
\nmissions and objectives of universities, looks into the phenomenon of transnational education TNE and
\nvirtual universities, describes the settings of open and distance learning ODL.
\nThis conference paper demonstrates that the traditional line drawn in Economics between goods
\nversus services is outdated due to the appearance of \u201cconservable human services\u201d (e.g. filmed lectures) and
\nby e-learning-tools through the application of standardised and repeatable (goods characteristics) automated
\nservices (e.g. an e-learning platform offering lectures, assignment and multiple-choice tests), services no
\nlonger provided by a human tutor rather than provided by a machine (virtual server) on the internet from
\nanywhere at anytime. From this perspective we need to define the term \u201cService-Good\u201d for describing the
\nelements of e-activity and technology in a changing learning environment.13
\nInternational Context
\nOn December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal
\nDeclaration of Human Rights 14 calling upon all Member countries to publicise the text of the Declaration and
\n“to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read and expounded principally in schools and other educational
\ninstitutions, without distinction based on the political status of countries or territories.” Article 26.(1) declares:
\nEveryone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental
\nstages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made
\ngenerally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
\nThe Governments of the States Parties to the UNESCO Constitution 15 on behalf of their peoples
\ndeclare that ignorance of each other’s ways and lives has been a common cause, throughout the history of
\nmankind, of that suspicion and mistrust between the peoples of the world through which their differences
\nhave all too often broken into war. To realize this purpose the Organization will collaborate in the work of
\nadvancing the mutual knowledge and understanding of peoples, through all means of mass communication
\nand to that end recommend such international agreements as may be necessary to promote the free flow of
\nideas by word and image; Give fresh impulse to popular education and to the spread of culture; by instituting
\ncollaboration among the nations to advance the ideal of equality of educational opportunity without regard to
\nrace, sex or any distinctions, economic or social.
\nThe World Declaration on Higher Education 16 shapes a new vision of higher education: Equity of
\naccess: In keeping with Article 26.1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, admission to higher
\neducation should be based on the merit, capacity, efforts, perseverance and devotion, showed by those
\nseeking access to it, and can take place in a lifelong scheme, at any time, with due recognition of previously
\nacquired skills. As a consequence, no discrimination can be accepted in granting access to higher education
\non grounds of race, gender, language or religion, or economic, cultural or social distinctions, or physical
\ndisabilities. Enhancing participation and promoting the role of women. Advancing knowledge through
\nresearch in science, the arts and humanities and the dissemination of its results. The advancement of
\n12 Berchtold, 2008, Transnational Higher Education, Universidad Azteca<\/em><\/span>
\n 13 Berchtold, 2006<\/em><\/span>
\n 14 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (www3.itu.int\/udhr), Article 26<\/em><\/span>
\n 15 CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC, AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION, Adopted in London<\/em><\/span>
\n on 16 November 1945 and amended by the General Conference sessions.<\/em><\/span>
\n 16 World Conference on Higher Education Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century: Vision and Action. 9 October 1998: World<\/em><\/span>
\n Declaration on Higher Education for the Twenty-first Century: Vision and Action<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u00a0<\/i><\/span>
\nknowledge through research is an essential function of all systems of higher education, which should
\npromote postgraduate studies. Innovation, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity should be promoted and
\nreinforced in programmes with long-term orientations on social and cultural aims and needs. An appropriate
\nbalance should be established between basic and target-oriented research. Long-term orientation based on
\nrelevance: Relevance in higher education should be assessed in terms of the fit between what society
\nexpects of institutions and what they do. This requires ethical standards, political impartiality, critical
\ncapacities and, at the same time, a better articulation with the problems of society and the world of work,
\nbasing long-term orientations on societal aims and needs, including respect for cultures and environmental
\nprotection. The concern is to provide access to both broad general education and targeted, career-specific
\neducation, often interdisciplinary, focusing on skills and aptitudes, both of which equip individuals to live in a
\nvariety of changing settings, and to be able to change occupations. Higher education should reinforce its role
\nof service to society, especially its activities aimed at eliminating poverty, intolerance, violence, illiteracy,
\nhunger, environmental degradation and disease, mainly through an interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary
\napproach in the analysis of problems and issues. Higher education should enhance its contribution to the
\ndevelopment of the whole education system, notably through improved teacher education, curriculum
\ndevelopment and educational research. Ultimately, higher education should aim at the creation of a new
\nsociety – non-violent and non-exploitative – consisting of highly cultivated, motivated and integrated
\nindividuals, inspired by love for humanity and guided by wisdom.
\nStrengthening co-operation with the world of work and analysing and anticipating societal needs: In
\neconomies characterized by changes and the emergence of new production paradigms based on knowledge
\nand its application, and on the handling of information, the links between higher education, the world of work
\nand other parts of society should be strengthened and renewed. Links with the world of work can be
\nstrengthened. As a lifelong source of professional training, updating and recycling, institutions of higher
\neducation should systematically take into account trends in the world of work and in the scientific,
\ntechnological and economic sectors. Developing entrepreneurial skills and initiative should become major
\nconcerns of higher education, in order to facilitate employability of graduates who will increasingly be called
\nupon to be not only job seekers but also and above all to become job creators.
\nDiversification for enhanced equity of opportunity 17 Diversifying higher education models and
\nrecruitment methods and criteria is essential both to meet increasing international demand and to provide
\naccess to various delivery modes and to extend access to an ever-wider public, in a lifelong perspective,
\nbased on flexible entry and exit points to and from the system of higher education. More diversified systems
\nof higher education are characterized by new types of tertiary institutions: public, private and non-profit
\ninstitutions, amongst others. Institutions should be able to offer a wide variety of education and training
\nopportunities: traditional degrees, short courses, part-time study, flexible schedules, modularized courses,
\nsupported learning at a distance, etc.
\nUNESCO\u2019s policy on open and distance learning 18 is based on its overall priority to foster access to
\nlifelong education for all. While the use of distance education was given early support by the Organization,
\nnew developments in information and communication technologies have radically increased the demand for
\nlifelong education but also provided new means to meet the demand. Facing the educational challenges of
\nthe 21st century, UNESCO continues, through open and distance learning, to contribute to the creation of a
\nunique learning society in a lifelong learning context.
\n17 World Conference on Higher Education Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century: Vision and Action. 9 October 1998: World<\/em><\/span>
\n Declaration on Higher Education for the Twenty-first Century: Vision and Action, Article 8<\/em><\/span>
\n 18 UNESCO 1997. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING. Executive Summary, Chapter XXII, p. 5<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u00a0<\/i><\/span><\/strong>
\nThe UNESCO Recommendation on the Recognition of Studies and Qualifications in Higher Education
\n19 stated that the great diversity of the cultures and higher education systems existing in the world constitutes
\nan exceptional resource that must be preserved, promoted and fostered, that higher education increasingly
\nhas an international dimension, owing to the rapid expansion and internationalization of knowledge and to the
\nlinks and solidarity established within the scientific and university community, and that wider access to
\neducational resources worldwide through greater mobility for students, researchers , teachers and specialists
\nis essential to this international dimension, the need for mutual recognition of studies and qualifications in
\nhigher education by all competent authorities and institutions as a means of increasing mobility of persons
\nand the exchange of ideas, knowledge and scientific and technological experience, and in order ultimately to
\npromote improvements everywhere in the quality of higher education, recognition will also promote an overall
\nincrease in the number of people able to benefit from higher education, the best possible use by all countries
\nof the means available for education and training, and the development of human resources, greater mobility
\nand a reduction in the difficulties encountered by persons who have been trained or educated abroad and
\nwho wish to study or practise a profession, a rapprochement and better understanding between cultures and
\npeoples, with mutual respect for their diversity.
\nAccording to Lachenmann 20 lifelong learning in knowledge societies needs social spaces and
\ninstitutional arrangements to be created in society and in the political system, securing access and flexibility,
\nand including institutional learning. Thereby, a mutual relationship is created with societal transformation.
\nKnowledge is the relevant resource for socio-economic change and innovations, starting from the every day
\nknowledge and local knowledge). Western knowledge, partly leading to concepts of appropriate technology,
\npartly to what could be called mystification of traditional knowledge. Nederveen Pieterse (1995, p. 45) uses
\nthe idea of \u2018globalisations in the plural\u2019 which follows ideas of different \u2018modernities\u2019 overcoming the ever
\npresent Western centricity. All institutions in society must be such as to make lifelong learning possible.
\nOrganisational development should be geared to encourage flexibility and learning. Organisations, including
\nenterprises, should be learning organisations themselves.
\nAll around the world, the growth and liberalization of international trade is changing the way we live and
\nwork.21 Trade flows and the rules that govern them are a massive force for economic, environmental and
\nsocial change. International trade is becoming an increasingly important driver of economic development, as
\nit has been expanding at almost twice the pace of total global economic activity for the past 15 years
\n(note:1985-2000). A growing number of developing countries look to trade and investment as a central part of
\ntheir strategies for development, and trade considerations are increasingly important in shaping economic
\npolicy in all developed countries, too.
\nUNESCO (1997) identifies challenges and opportunities: The last two decades have seen considerable
\ngrowth in education and training. But the world still suffers from intolerable inequalities at the international
\nlevel and sometimes within nations. At the root is often the problem of financing adequate provision of
\neducation and training. The rapid development of information and communication technologies and the move
\ntowards a more knowledge-intensive, interdependent society create new challenges and opportunities for the
\ndesign and delivery of education. For the student\/learner open and distance learning means increased
\naccess and flexibility, as well as the combination of work and education. It may also mean a more learnercentred
\napproach, enrichment, higher quality and new ways of interaction. For employers it offers high quality
\nand often cost-effective professional development in the workplace. It allows upgrading of skills, increased
\nproductivity and development of a new learning culture. In addition, it means sharing of costs, of training time,
\n19 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization adopted by the General Conference at its twenty-seventh session in<\/em><\/span>
\n Paris, 13 November 1993 the Recommendation on the Recognition of Studies and Qualifications in Higher Education<\/em><\/span>
\n 20 UNESCO 2001: Creative and Inclusive Strategies for Lifelong Learning: Societal and cultural enabling environment, spaces,<\/em><\/span>
\n knowledge and agency for lifelong learning. Gudrun Lachenmann, p. 56ff<\/em><\/span>
\n 21 UNEP-ETU and IISD 2000<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u00a0<\/i><\/span>
\nand increased portability of training. For governments the main potential is to increase the capacity of
\neducation and training systems, to reach target groups with limited access to conventional education and
\ntraining, to support and enhance the quality and relevance of existing educational structures, to achieve more
\ncost effective education and training, and to promote innovation and opportunities for lifelong learning. 22
\nBittner 23 takes a focus on lifelong learning, pursuing the question of how different areas of education
\nneed to change in order to contribute to the implementation of this internationally recognized principle. In the
\nmodern knowledge and information society, knowledge becomes more and more important. Knowledge
\nbecomes increasingly important for the individual as much as for our society. Future life chances depend to a
\ngreat extent on whether individuals are successful in acquiring knowledge. Therefore education plays a key
\nrole with respect to future changes and development, not only for personal development but also for
\nparticipation and democratic citizenship, and for employability of the individual and the competitiveness of our
\neconomy. It is by reorganizing teaching and learning that we will be able to impart and acquire the knowledge
\nthat we will need tomorrow. The traditional occupation principle, that is, lifelong employment in an occupation
\nfor which one has been trained, has long since become outdated. Increasingly, work organization is based
\nless on hierarchical structures, combines work and learning, and is characterized by team work and greater
\nindividual responsibility as well as by the ability to organize change. Social and economic progress and future
\ncompetitiveness will largely depend on motivation for lifelong learning. An aging society is also a factor here.
\nGrowing qualification requirements must not lead to social exclusion. Enabling less qualified adults to engage
\nin lifelong learning is of particular importance.
\nMy Von Euler and David Berg 24 report the most common level of education offered by the different
\ninstitutions represented in their survey is tertiary education. Continuing education, education offered to those
\nwho seek educational opportunities after the \u2018traditional\u2019 school age, for example to increase job or career
\nopportunities, is also provided by a large group of programmes. In considering distance education and open
\nlearning opportunities in the world, the actual learning process is of greatest interest to educators.
\nUniversities Going Virtual
\nAcross the world there are differing standards for the legal definition of the term “university” and formal
\naccreditation of institutions. There is no nationally standardized definition of the term in the United States,
\nalthough the term is primarily used to designate research institutions and is often reserved for doctorategranting
\ninstitutions. 25
\nDr. Carlos T\u00fcnnermann defines a university: \u201cLa instituci\u00f3n cultural y cient\u00edfica por excelencia creada
\npor el hombre\u201d. 26 \u201cThe cultural and scientific institution for excellence created for man\u201d.
\nAccording to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 27, a university is an institution of higher education and
\nresearch, which grants academic degrees in a variety of subjects. A university provides both undergraduate
\neducation and postgraduate education. The word university is derived from the Latin universitas magistrorum
\net scholarium, roughly meaning “community of teachers and scholars.
\nThe Encarta Dictionary defines the university as the complex entity of university instruction and
\nresearch, buildings and housing, and people (students and faculty): a university is an undergraduate and
\npostgraduate educational institution for higher learning typically including an undergraduate college and
\n22 UNESCO 1997. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING. Executive Summary, Chapters II, III, p. 1<\/em><\/span>
\n 23 UNESCO 2001: Creative and Inclusive Strategies for Lifelong Learning: Lifelong learning: implementing a generally accepted<\/em><\/span>
\n principle. Elisabeth Bittner, p. 11ff<\/em><\/span>
\n 24 UNESCO 1998: The use of Electronic Media In Open Learning and Distance Education. My Von Euler, David Berg, p. 7<\/em><\/span>
\n 25 US Department of State: Types of Graduate schools<\/em><\/span>
\n 26 (Siles Levy, 2003, 3)<\/em><\/span>
\n 27 Encyclopedia Britannica http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/w\/index.php?title=University&printable=yes retrieved from Google eBook of<\/em><\/span>
\n Encyclopedia Britannica<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u00a0<\/i><\/span>
\ngraduate schools in various disciplines, as well as medical and law schools and sometimes other
\nprofessional schools. 28
\nThe original Latin word \u201cuniversitas\u201d referred to places of learning in Europe using Latin. The Latin word
\n“academia” related to a number of educational institutions of non-Western antiquity. The University of
\nConstantinople, founded as an institution of higher learning in 425 AD and reorganized as a corporation of
\nstudents in 849 is considered by some to be the earliest institution of higher learning with some of the
\ncharacteristics we associate today with a university (research and teaching, auto-administration, academic
\nindependence). If a university is defined as “an institution of higher learning” then it is preceded by several
\nothers, including the Academy that it was founded to compete with and eventually replaced. If the original
\nmeaning of the word is considered “a corporation of students” then this could be the first example of such an
\ninstitution. 29
\nIf the definition of a university is assumed to mean an institution of higher education and research
\nwhich issues academic degrees at all levels (bachelor, master and doctorate) like in the modern sense of the
\nword, then the medieval Madrasahs known as Jami’ah (“university” in Arabic) founded in the 9th century
\nwould be the first examples of such an institution. 30 31
\nThe earliest universities in Western Europe were developed under the aegis of the Catholic Church,
\nusually as cathedral schools or by papal bull as Studia Generali or or municipal administrations. The end of
\nthe medieval period marked the beginning of the transformation of universities that would eventually result in
\nthe modern research university. Many external influences, such as eras of Humanism, Enlightenment,
\nReformation, and revolution, shaped research universities during their development. By the 18th century,
\nuniversities published their own research journals, and by the 19th century, the German and the French
\nuniversity models had arisen. The German, or Humboldtian model, liberal ideas pertaining to the importance
\nof freedom, seminars, and laboratories in universities. The French university model involved strict discipline
\nand control over every aspect of the university. Until the 19th century, religion played a significant role in
\nuniversity curriculum; however, the role of religion in research universities decreased in the 19th century, and
\nby the end of the 19th century, the German university model had spread around the world. Universities
\nconcentrated on science in the 19th and 20th centuries and become increasingly accessible to the masses.
\nIn Britain the move from industrial revolution to modernity saw the arrival of new civic universities with an
\nemphasis on science and engineering. The British also established universities worldwide, and higher
\neducation became available to the masses not only in Europe. In a general sense, the basic structure and
\naims of universities have remained constant over the years. Although each institution is differently organized,
\nmost universities have a board of trustees; president, chancellor, or rector; vice president(s), vicechancellor(
\ns), or vice-rector(s); and deans of various divisions. Universities are generally divided into a
\nnumber of academic departments, schools or faculties. Public university systems are ruled over by
\ngovernment-run higher education boards. However, many public universities in the world have a considerable
\ndegree of financial, research and pedagogical autonomy. Private universities are privately funded and
\ngenerally have a broader independence from state policies. 32
\n28 Encarta World English Dictionary, p. 1944<\/em><\/span>
\n 29 Jerome Bump, The Origin of Universities, University of Texas at Austin<\/em><\/span>
\n 30 Makdisi, George (April-June 1989), “Scholasticism and Humanism in Classical Islam and the Christian West”, Journal of the American<\/em><\/span>
\n Oriental Society 109 (2): 175\u2013182 [175\u201377]<\/em><\/span>
\n 31 Alatas, Syed Farid (2006), “From Jami`ah to University: Multiculturalism and Christian\u2013Muslim Dialogue”, Current Sociology 54 (1):<\/em><\/span>
\n 112\u201332<\/em><\/span>
\n 32 http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/w\/index.php?title=University&printable=yes<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u00a0<\/i><\/span>
\nThe Framework for Priority Action for Change and Development of Higher Education 33 demands that
\nas priority actions at the levels of systems and institutions, that each higher education institution should
\ndefine its mission according to the present and future needs of society and base it on an awareness of the
\nfact that higher education is essential for any country or region to reach the necessary level of sustainable
\nand environmentally sound economic and social development, cultural creativity nourished by better
\nknowledge and understanding of the cultural heritage, higher living standards, and internal and international
\nharmony and peace, based on human rights, democracy, tolerance and mutual respect. These missions
\nshould incorporate the concept of academic freedom set out in the Recommendation concerning the Status
\nof Higher-Education Teaching Personnel approved by the General Conference of UNESCO in November
\n1997.
\nHigher education has given ample proof of its viability over the centuries and of its ability to change and
\nto induce change and progress in society. Owing to the scope and pace of change, society has become
\nincreasingly knowledge-based so that higher learning and research now act as essential components of
\ncultural, socio-economic and environmentally sustainable development of individuals, communities and
\nnations. Higher education itself is confronted therefore with formidable challenges and must proceed to the
\nmost radical change and renewal it has ever been required to undertake, so that our society, which is
\ncurrently undergoing a profound crisis of values, can transcend mere economic considerations and
\nincorporate deeper dimensions of morality and spirituality. It is with the aim of providing solutions to these
\nchallenges and of setting in motion a process of in-depth reform in higher education worldwide that UNESCO
\nhas convened a World Conference on Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century: Vision and Action. 34
\nAccording to the paper, \u2018Open and Distance Learning: Prospects and Policy Consideration\u201935, prepared
\nby UNESCO as a contribution to the on-going discussion on the ever wider role that open and distance
\nlearning is expected to assume in the educational landscape of tomorrow, the increasing international interest
\nin open and distance learning and the subsequent expansion of the respective institutions and programmes
\nis a most remarkable development in the field of education and training of recent years. There seems to be
\nno doubt that open and distance learning is in a process of establishing itself as an integral part of
\neducational delivery systems; to contribute to national reflections on the use of open and distance learning,
\nincluding its policies and priorities, and to inspire cooperation at the national, regional and sub-regional levels
\nthat will help strengthen the chances of providing lifelong education for all.
\nThe UNESCO Recommendation on the Recognition of Studies and Qualifications in Higher Education
\nprovides the following definitions 36:
\n(a) ‘higher education’ means all types of studies, training or training for research at the post-secondary level,
\nprovided by universities or other educational establishments, that are approved as institutions of higher
\neducation by the competent State authorities;
\n(b) ‘qualification in higher education’ means any diploma, degree or other qualifying certificate that is awarded
\nby an institution of higher education, or another appropriate authority, that establishes that the holder has
\nsuccessfully completed a course of study and qualifies him or her either to continue to a further stage of
\nstudy or to practise a profession not requiring further special preparation;
\n33 World Conference on Higher Education Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century: Vision and Action. 9 October 1998: World<\/em><\/span>
\n Declaration on Higher Education for the Twenty-first Century: Vision and Action, Adoption<\/em><\/span>
\n 34 World Conference on Higher Education Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century: Vision and Action. 9 October 1998: World<\/em><\/span>
\n Declaration on Higher Education for the Twenty-first Century: Vision and Action<\/em><\/span>
\n 35 UNESCO 1997. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING. Prospects and Policy Considerations. ED-97\/WS\/52<\/em><\/span>
\n 36 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization adopted by the General Conference at its twenty-seventh session in<\/em><\/span>
\n Paris, 13 November 1993 the Recommendation on the Recognition of Studies and Qualifications in Higher Education<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u00a0<\/i><\/span>
\n(c) ‘partial studies’ means any homogeneous fraction of a course at the first stage or at more advanced
\nstages of higher studies that has been evaluated and authenticated and, while not a complete course in itself,
\ncan be equated with a significant acquisition of knowledge or skill;
\n(d) ‘secondary education’ means studies of any kind that follow primary, elementary or basic education and
\nare a prerequisite for admission to higher education;
\n(e) ‘recognition’ of a foreign qualification in higher education means its acceptance by the competent
\nauthorities of the State concerned (whether they be governmental or non-governmental) as entitling its holder
\nto be considered under the same conditions as those holding a comparable qualification awarded in that
\nState and deemed comparable, for the purposes of access to or further pursuit of higher education studies,
\nparticipation in research , the practice of a profession if this does not require the passing of examinations or
\nfurther special preparation , or all the foregoing, according to the scope of the recognition;
\n(f) ‘recognition’ of a foreign certificate of secondary education for the purpose of undertaking studies at the
\nhigher level means its acceptance by the competent authorities of the State concerned as entitling its holder
\nto be considered for admission to its higher education institutions under the same conditions as the holder of
\na comparable qualification or certificate awarded in that State;
\n(g) ‘recognition’ of a foreign qualification or of a foreign certificate of partial studies of higher education means
\nacceptance by the competent authorities of the State concerned that the holder is entitled to be considered
\nfor further studies at its higher education and research institutions under the same conditions as those
\npertaining to the holder of a comparable qualification or certificate awarded in that State;
\n(h) ‘recognition’ of a foreign qualification in higher education with a view to the practice of a profession means
\nacceptance by the competent authorities of the professional preparation of the holder for the practice of the
\nprofession concerned, without prejudice, however, to the legal and professional rules or procedures in force
\nin the States concerned and provided the holder would be entitled to practise the same profession in the
\nState in which the professional preparation and qualification had been obtained; such recognition does not
\nexempt the holder of the foreign qualification from complying with any other conditions for the practice of the
\nprofession concerned that may be laid down by the competent governmental or professional authorities in the
\nStates concerned.
\nRecognition of a qualification or certificate may not give a greater right to consideration in another State
\nthan in the State in which it was conferred.
\nFor the purposes of the Lisbon Convention 37, the following terms shall have the following meaning:
\nAccess (to higher education) The right of qualified candidates to apply and to be considered for
\nadmission to higher education.
\nAdmission (to higher education institutions and programmes): The act of, or system for, allowing
\nqualified applicants to pursue studies in higher education at a given institution and\/or a given programme.
\nAssessment (of institutions or programmes): The process for establishing the educational quality of a
\nhigher education institution or programme.
\nAssessment (of individual qualifications): The written appraisal or evaluation of an individual’s foreign
\nqualifications by a competent body.
\nCompetent recognition authority: A body officially charged with making binding decisions on the
\nrecognition of foreign qualifications.
\nHigher education: All types of courses of study, or sets of courses of study, training or training for
\nresearch at the post secondary level which are recognized by the relevant authorities of a Party as belonging
\nto its higher education system.
\n37 Convention on the recognition of qualifications concerning higher education in the european region (The European Treaty Series,<\/em><\/span>
\n n\u00b0165, Council of Europe – UNESCO joint Convention) Lisbon, 11 April 1997<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u00a0<\/i><\/span>
\nHigher education institution: An establishment providing higher education and recognized by the competent
\nauthority of a Party as belonging to its system of higher education.
\nHigher education programme: A course of study recognized by the competent authority of a Party as
\nbelonging to its system of higher education, and the completion of which provides the student with a higher
\neducation qualification.
\nPeriod of study: Any component of a higher education programme which has been evaluated and
\ndocumented and, while not a complete programme of study in itself, represents a significant acquisition of
\nknowledge or skill.
\nQualification
\nA. Higher education qualification: Any degree, diploma or other certificate issued by a competent authority
\nattesting the successful completion of a higher education programme.
\nB. Qualification giving access to higher education: Any diploma or other certificate issued by a competent
\nauthority attesting the successful completion of an education programme and giving the holder of the
\nqualification the right to be considered for admission to higher education (cf. the definition of access).
\nRecognition: A formal acknowledgement by a competent authority of the value of a foreign educational
\nqualification with a view to access to educational and\/or employment activities.
\nRequirement
\nA. General requirements: Conditions that must in all cases be fulfilled for access to higher education, or to a
\ngiven level thereof, or for the award of a higher education qualification at a given level.
\nB. Specific requirements: Conditions that must be fulfilled, in addition to the general requirements, in order to
\ngain admission to a particular higher education programme, or for the award of a specific higher education
\nqualification in a particular field of study.
\nThe World Declaration on Higher Education 38 proclaims the following missions and functions of higher
\neducation: Mission to educate, to train and to undertake research, affirming that the core missions and values
\nof higher education, in particular the mission to contribute to the sustainable development and improvement
\nof society as a whole, should be preserved, reinforced and further expanded, namely, to: (a) educate highly
\nqualified graduates and responsible citizens able to meet the needs of all sectors of human activity, by
\noffering relevant qualifications, including professional training, which combine high-level knowledge and
\nskills, using courses and content continually tailored to the present and future needs of society; (b) provide
\nopportunities (espace ouvert) for higher learning and for learning throughout life, giving to learners an optimal
\nrange of choice and a flexibility of entry and exit points within the system, as well as an opportunity for
\nindividual development and social mobility in order to educate for citizenship and for active participation in
\nsociety, with a worldwide vision, for endogenous capacity-building, and for the consolidation of human rights,
\nsustainable development, democracy and peace, in a context of justice; (c) advance, create and disseminate
\nknowledge through research and provide, as part of its service to the community, relevant expertise to assist
\nsocieties in cultural, social and economic development, promoting and developing scientific and technological
\nresearch as well as research in the social sciences, the humanities and the creative arts; (d) help understand,
\ninterpret, preserve, enhance, promote and disseminate national and regional, international and historic
\ncultures, in a context of cultural pluralism and diversity; (e) help protect and enhance societal values by
\ntraining young people in the values which form the basis of democratic citizenship and by providing critical
\n38 World Conference on Higher Education Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century: Vision and Action. 9 October 1998: World<\/em><\/span>
\n Declaration on Higher Education for the Twenty-first Century: Vision and Action<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u00a0<\/i><\/span>
\nand detached perspectives to assist in the discussion of strategic options and the reinforcement of
\nhumanistic perspectives; (f) contribute to the development and improvement of education at all levels,
\nincluding through the training of teachers.
\nEthical role, autonomy, responsibility and anticipatory function: In accordance with the
\nRecommendation concerning the Status of Higher-Education Teaching Personnel39, higher education
\ninstitutions and their personnel and students should: (a) preserve and develop their crucial functions, through
\nthe exercise of ethics and scientific and intellectual rigour in their various activities; (b) be able to speak out
\non ethical, cultural and social problems completely independently and in full awareness of their
\nresponsibilities, exercising a kind of intellectual authority that society needs to help it to reflect, understand
\nand act; (c) enhance their critical and forward-looking functions, through continuing analysis of emerging
\nsocial, economic, cultural and political trends, providing a focus for forecasting, warning and prevention; (d)
\nexercise their intellectual capacity and their moral prestige to defend and actively disseminate universally
\naccepted values, including peace, justice, freedom, equality and solidarity, as enshrined in UNESCO\u2019s
\nConstitution; (e) enjoy full academic autonomy and freedom, conceived as a set of rights and duties, while
\nbeing fully responsible and accountable to society; (f) play a role in helping identify and address issues that
\naffect the well-being of communities, nations and global society.
\nThere is already a variety of technologies available at different levels of sophistication, which may fit
\nmost educational requirements reasonably well. There is great potential for new, advanced technologies
\nachieved in an increasingly integrated way and at decreasing costs. The challenge will be to utilize this
\npotential in accordance with clear educational and instructional strategies, and to integrate the cultural and
\nintellectual developments caused by the new technologies in the global information society. Interactivity is a
\nkey element in most of the new services that are foreseen. The technologies are particularly adaptable to the
\ncommunication needs of dispersed users, but on the other hand need reliable networks. There is no simple
\nanswer to the question of what models and structures open and distance learning institutions will adopt in the
\nfuture. There is an increasing tendency to use open and distance learning in traditional universities, and this
\nwill almost certainly be extended to all levels and all sectors. On the other hand, there will also be room for
\nother types of institutions, both public and private. New markets and technologies will impose changes in all
\nexisting institutions, and new types of services and institutions will emerge. Nevertheless, there will be a
\ncontinuous need for dedicated distance learning institutions (open universities) or departments with a
\ncapacity for serving very large target groups. All institutions will need to develop new partnerships and
\nalliances in order to meet the needs of society in more effective ways than most of them do today. The wealth
\nof experience and competence in open and distance learning institutions must be capitalized on in future
\nstructures. 40
\nThe World Declaration on Higher Education for the Twenty-first Century: Vision and Action 41 and
\nFramework for Priority Action for Change and Development in Higher Education postulates that there is an
\nunprecedented demand for and a great diversification in higher education, as well as an increased
\nawareness of its vital importance for socio-cultural and economic development, and for building the future, for
\nwhich the younger generations will need to be equipped with new skills, knowledge and ideals. Higher
\neducation includes \u2018all types of studies, training or training for research at the post-secondary level, provided
\nby universities or other educational establishments that are approved as institutions of higher education by
\nthe competent State authorities\u2019. Everywhere higher education is faced with great challenges and difficulties
\nrelated to financing, equity of conditions at access into and during the course of studies, improved staff
\ndevelopment, skills-based training, enhancement and preservation of quality in teaching, research and
\n39 approved by the General Conference of UNESCO in November 1997<\/em><\/span>
\n 40 UNESCO 1997. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING. Executive Summary, Chapters XVI, XVII, p. 3f<\/em><\/span>
\n 41 World Conference on Higher Education Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century: Vision and Action. 9 October 1998: World<\/em><\/span>
\n Declaration on Higher Education for the Twenty-first Century: Vision and Action<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u00a0<\/i><\/span>
\nservices, relevance of programmes, employability of graduates, establishment of efficient co-operation
\nagreements and equitable access to the benefits of international co-operation. At the same time, higher
\neducation is being challenged by new opportunities relating to technologies that are improving the ways in
\nwhich knowledge can be produced, managed, disseminated, accessed and controlled. Equitable access to
\nthese technologies should be ensured at all levels of education systems. The second half of the last century
\nwill go down in the history of higher education as the period of its most spectacular expansion: an over sixfold
\nincrease in student enrolments worldwide, from 13 million in 1960 to 82 million in 1995. But it is also the
\nperiod which has seen the gap between industrially developed, the developing countries and in particular the
\nleast developed countries with regard to access and resources for higher learning and research, already
\nenormous, becoming even wider. It has also been a period of increased socio-economic stratification and
\ngreater difference in educational opportunity within countries, including in some of the most developed and
\nwealthiest nations. Without adequate higher education and research institutions providing a critical mass of
\nskilled and educated people, no country can ensure genuine endogenous and sustainable development and,
\nin particular, developing countries and least developed countries cannot reduce the gap separating them
\nfrom the industrially developed ones. Sharing knowledge, international co-operation and new technologies
\ncan offer new opportunities to reduce this gap. Convinced that education is a fundamental pillar of human
\nrights, democracy, sustainable development and peace, and shall therefore become accessible to all
\nthroughout life and that measures are required to ensure co-ordination and co-operation across and between
\nthe various sectors, particularly between general, technical and professional secondary and post-secondary
\neducation as well as between universities, colleges and technical institutions. Believing that, in this context,
\nthe solution of the problems faced on the eve of the twenty-first century will be determined by the vision of the
\nfuture society and by the role that is assigned to education in general and to higher education in particular,
\naware that on the threshold of a new millennium it is the duty of higher education to ensure that the values
\nand ideals of a culture of peace prevail and that the intellectual community should be mobilized to that end,
\nconsidering that a substantial change and development of higher education, the enhancement of its quality
\nand relevance, and the solution to the major challenges it faces, require the strong involvement not only of
\ngovernments and of higher education institutions, but also of all stakeholders, emphasizing that higher
\neducation systems should enhance their capacity to live with uncertainty, to change and bring about change,
\nand to address social needs and to promote solidarity and equity; should preserve and exercise scientific
\nrigour and originality, in a spirit of impartiality, as a basic prerequisite for attaining and sustaining an
\nindispensable level of quality; and should place students at the centre of their concerns, within a lifelong
\nperspective, so as to allow their full integration into the global knowledge society of the coming century, also
\nbelieving that international co-operation and exchange are major avenues for advancing higher education
\nthroughout the world.
\nWagner suggests a scenario for the future role of universities: Open universities, distance teaching
\norganizations as well as traditional universities or colleges are facing more or less the same changes in the
\nmodern “electronic information world”. So their challenges are similar ones. What is different are their
\nhistories, their clients, their modes and cultures of teaching and learning – thus their platforms for action and
\ntheir options and conditions for change and development. Wagner does not focus on future scenarios for
\nuniversities in much detail, rather than trying to outline some of the most important aspects and impacts on
\nthe prospective roles of universities and their possible strategies for “virtualization”. For him there is no doubt
\nthat external and internal conditions for universities will change in a way that urges these organizations to
\nredefine their tasks and their methods. Situated between a rich and committing history and tradition on one
\nside and rapid change and innovation in economic, social, political, cultural and organizational areas
\nuniversities will have to find (to invent) their adequate shape of the “campus” in the future. It will not only be
\nthe matter to put a lecture “on the net” and produce some CD-ROMs and multi-media courses. Universities
\nand colleges will have to answer on fundamental issues like a new character of knowledge itself, the tentative
\nloss of tradition, an overwhelming need for collaboration and networking. However, Wagner sees a<\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u00a0<\/i><\/span>
\nrequirement for change-management within a framework for cooperative development: Who ever wants to
\nstart the development of a “virtual” university in a traditional environment will have to invent a rather complex
\nplan, strategy and methodology for the change management. There will be no success if there won\u00b4t be
\nfound a suitable framework for collaborative development. Collaboration is needed within a university
\nincluding faculty, library, computing-, media- and distance-education-centres – as well as administration and
\nmanagement. Most often collaboration will be needed with resource- and competence-centres from outside
\none single university. Legal aspects will have to be resolved in the political and administrative area. In
\ngeneral collaboration with enterprises, social organizations and broadcasting \/ publishing \/ media companies
\nwill be crucial. Not many universities are used to this on an organizational level even if there may be well
\nestablished networks on a personal or expert level. 42
\nSome mega universities such as Anadolu University in Turkey and China Central Radio and TV
\nUniversity in China and IGNOU in India have over 500,000 active students. Considering the high level of
\nstudent enrolment, the mega univerisities are becoming \u201cvery important for the future of higher education
\n(HE) all over the world\u201d43, including HE as part of lifelong learning.
\nIn parallel with the development of mega universities, cross-border DE has grown. For example, universities
\nin Australia, UK, USA, and Canada have actively exported their DE programmes to other parts of the world.
\nChina, Hong Kong (China), India, Malaysia and Singapore in the Asia-Pacific region have been among major
\nimporters of those programmes. However, among those importers, Hong Kong (China), India and Malaysia
\nhave also exported their programmes to other countries such as Bangladesh, China, Indonesia and Sri Lanka
\n(Jung, 2004a).
\nMoreover, many conventional DE institutions have begun to introduce information and communication
\ntechnology (ICT) mainly as supplementary modes of instruction. Some institutions including a few mega
\nuniversities have created e-learning programmes. Examples include the e-MBA programme of the Anadolu
\nUniversity in Turkey, the online Lifelong Education Graduate School at the Korea National Open University in
\nKorea, the online MBA of the Athabasca University in Canada. Besides these institutions, for-profit e-learning
\nproviders have appeared in the DE market. In the Asia-Pacific region, main providers of e-learning include
\nThomson Learning, Apollo International and UNext.
\nThese trends challenge the existing quality assurance (QA) frameworks of DE, which have focused
\nmore on widening access than on assuring quality, and often do not address for-profit and cross-border
\neducation. Especially in the context of growing globalisation in distance education, there has been an urgent
\nneed for international initiatives to review quality assurance mechanisms of DE for higher education at the
\nnational and institutional level, discuss new challenges of a changing DE environment, and build a capacity
\nfor QA to enhance the quality provision in a globalised higher education market. 44
\nTransnational Higher Education \u2013 Open and Distance Education
\nBut having said that it is vital to recognise that, while higher education may be traded in a marketplace, it is a
\nquite different proposition from cars or bananas. The challenge is to come up with an appropriate way of
\nmaximising the benefits and minimising the dangers now that higher education is a global phenomenon. 45
\n42 Wagner, E., (1998) Creating a Virtual University in a Traditional Environment.<\/em><\/span>
\n 43 Daniel, 1998<\/em><\/span>
\n 44 UNESCO\/COL 2005: QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEY OF MEGA UNIVERSITIES. Insung Jung, p. 80f<\/em><\/span>
\n 45 John Daniel, Assistant Director-General for Education for UNESCO, Paris, at the First Global Forum on International Quality<\/em><\/span>
\n Assurance, Accreditation and the Recognition of Qualifications in Higher Education \u201cGLOBALISATION AND HIGHER EDUCATION\u201d,<\/em><\/span>
\n about \u201cAUTOMOBILES, BANANAS, COURSES, DEGREES\u2026An ABC of Higher Education and Globalisation\u201d, 17 October 2002.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The role of open and distance learning in educational innovation, according to UNESCO 46 is summarised: As
\nincreasing acceptance within conventional education institutions and among educational planners is gained,
\nopen and distance learning has the potential to generate new patterns of teaching and learning that may
\ninfluence the way education in general is provided. By reaching new target groups distance education makes
\nthe actual needs of education in society more visible. Distance education and open learning are part of the
\neconomic and educational response to popular demand and to economic and political objectives concerning
\nthe provision of appropriate learning opportunities from the perspective of lifelong learning. It may therefore
\nenhance a more student and consumer-oriented approach and more extensive contact between educational
\ninstitutions on the one hand and community-based organizations, business and industry on the other. By
\ndeveloping and producing high quality learning materials open and distance learning systems often make
\nnew and better learning resources available. This may have a particular influence when teachers and
\nprofessors of conventional institutions become involved in the Open and distance learning development or
\nuse of these materials, for instance on contract with a distance teaching institution. The introduction of a
\ndistance programme at a conventional university may also lead to curriculum reform and new learning
\nmaterials for resident students in the same subjects. In some projects distance learning is used
\nsystematically to support conventional systems at basic and secondary levels. The potential of distance
\nlearning to increase innovation and creativity in conventional education depends on the degree of interaction
\nbetween distance learning systems and conventional systems. In this connection one should not forget the
\nrole of dedicated and specialized institutions in the development of knowledge and practice. Ideally, there
\nought to be effective links between such institutions and the conventional system, in order that they may
\nserve as national resource centres. The need for education for the entire population, in both developing and
\ndeveloped countries, generates a significant interest in the application of more technology-based educational
\nprogrammes. Open and distance learning is closely linked to the development of information and
\ncommunication technologies, to the emergence of new learning needs and new patterns of information
\naccess and application in the information society. The development of open and distance learning often
\nprovides a propitious environment for the introduction of and experimentation with technologies in education,
\nand will therefore influence mainstream education. It generates new insights and knowledge about learning
\nconditions and processes, and may even have effects beyond the realm of education itself, affecting the
\nindividual and society both economically and culturally.
\nDaniel suggests: In finding a way forward we should start from where we are. The regional conventions
\nfor the recognition of qualifications, (\u2026) represent one place where we are. These conventions have a
\nrespectable history. A concerted attempt to update them and bring them together globally could be one way
\nforward. We are also at the end of a decade during which our understanding of quality assurance and
\nassessment in higher education has become much more sophisticated. This, too, provides a way forward.
\n(\u2026) to develop that sophisticated understanding of quality, which trade in higher education requires more
\nthan trade in bananas or cars. The (\u2026) quality rankings (\u2026) shows how quality assessment can help to
\nreassure people that new approaches can actually enhance quality. 47
\nMcIntosh 48 postulates that those engaged in making policies relating to distance higher education and
\nthe use of ICTs are constantly having to strike a balance between universalising tendencies (globalisation,
\nstudent mobility, the need for international standards and norms etc.) and the demands of different nations,
\ncultures, population groups and constituencies.
\n46 UNESCO 1997. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING. Prospects and Policy Considerations. ED-97\/WS\/52, p. 16<\/em><\/span>
\n 47 (UNESCO, 2002, 41, see Daniel)<\/em><\/span>
\n 48 UNESCO\/COL 2005: CONCLUSION. Christopher McIntosh, p. 152<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u00a0<\/i><\/span>
\nSharing knowledge and know-how across borders and continents 49 – The principle of solidarity and true
\npartnership amongst higher education institutions worldwide is crucial for education and training in all fields
\nthat encourage an understanding of global issues, the role of democratic governance and skilled human
\nresources in their resolution, and the need for living together with different cultures and values. The practice
\nof multilingualism, faculty and student exchange programmes and institutional linkage to promote intellectual
\nand scientific co-operation should be an integral part of all higher education systems. The principles of
\ninternational co-operation based on solidarity, recognition and mutual support, true partnership that equitably
\nserves the interests of the partners and the value of sharing knowledge and know-how across borders should
\ngovern relationships among higher education institutions in both developed and developing countries and
\nshould benefit the least developed countries in particular.
\nDaniel postulates that new need not be bad: One basic principle is that new need not be bad. One of
\nthe benefits of globalisation is that it promotes competition, and competition creates diversity. The idea that
\nglobalisation means homogenisation flies in the face of all the evidence. Globalisation is certainly creating
\ndiversity in higher education. However, higher education is a conservative enterprise. What is new is
\nregarded with suspicion. It has to prove itself, which is absolutely right. But we must guard against the
\nmindless rejection of new approaches even when they have proved themselves. 50
\nWagner 51 summarises his analysis of how to create a Virtual University: Universities almost
\neverywhere in the world as well as political bodies, organizations and networks in the academic area have
\nstarted to “go virtual”. What does this mean? “Virtual” is a new expression in this context. Mostly it stands for
\norganizing and delivering study programmes via telematic networks (usually the Internet). Often there is a
\nvision of a university without buildings, without lots of teaching staff and with no students present at the same
\ntime and the same place with any lecturer. What is the attraction or need of a vision like this for a traditional
\nuniversity which – sometimes for hundreds of years – have done really the opposite: they worked hard to
\ncreate an adequate environment for teaching and learning within the walls of the “university”. To build a
\ncampus as a dedicated area for research and learning for quite some time was the benchmark.
\nWagner explains the term Virtual University: “Virtual University”: What is the meaning of “virtual”?
\nRecently many universities have started projects, written papers and organized meetings and workshops
\ndealing with the development of “virtual university”. Analyzing what is really done or meant with this you may
\nfind the following activities: Courses and study programmes are put on the Internet so that students from all
\naround the world will have access to these courses or programmes. Sometimes there is tuition on the net
\n(newsgroups, chat, email), sometimes it is not. Lectures are sent from one university to another one to offer
\nthese at the same time to students at different places. Several universities offer selected courses for
\ncontinuous education on the net for free choice and combination. All university services and functions (as
\nadministration, library, social life, meetings with staff and lecturers, cafes and so on) are simulated on the
\nInternet so that no physical interaction will be needed any more to complete a study programme. A central
\ninstitution offers combinations of study programmes or courses from different universities to create ones own
\ncurriculum (broker institution). These are some examples. They do not describe everything in this field. What
\ndoes “virtual” mean in this global and rapid development? First it indicates the aspect of introducing a
\ntelematic network into the process and interaction of teaching and learning. Electronic media do play an
\nimportant role between lecturers and students as well as between the students themselves. Second it is
\nhighlighted that most or even all the communications on a campus may be replaced by electronic networks.
\nThird the characteristic “virtual” incorporates a vision that no real campus as a separate organization will be
\nneeded at all but that a university may be created as a virtual network of elements and contributions of
\n49 World Conference on Higher Education Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century: Vision and Action. 9 October 1998: World<\/em><\/span>
\n Declaration on Higher Education for the Twenty-first Century: Vision and Action, Article 15<\/em><\/span>
\n 50 (UNESCO, 2002, 40, see Daniel)<\/em><\/span>
\n 51 Wagner (1998)<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u00a0<\/i><\/span>
\ndifferent universities or other bodies. Fourth there is a focus on the independency of time and place and a
\nvirtual university thus is identified with open and\/or distance learning frameworks. Summing up one can
\neasily see that “virtual” does not really define something very specific but describes a bundle of more or less
\ndifferent concepts as a metaphor to point out a trend in the change of the organization of academic teaching
\nand learning. “Virtual” may be a transitory concept, until there will be reached more precise concepts, data
\nand experiences.
\nThe ways in which societies, individuals, groups and communities develop uses of the Internet will
\nfashion how and what this complexity produces. 52
\nWagner 53 explains why (traditional) universities are going “virtual”: It may not at all be a surprise that
\ninstitutions in the area of open and distance learning are heading towards a virtual university approach as
\ndescribed above. But why do traditional universities start planning, project work and resource development
\nvia (at least some) elements of a “virtual campus”? Regarding the descriptions of what universities and
\ncolleges do in the field, some of the reasons seem obvious: Outside the academic area multi-media and
\nelectronic networks are rapidly gaining an increasing impact on a great many services (also in the training
\ndepartments of enterprises and other organizations). Students to a huge extend enter university education
\nwith a solid and sometimes very elaborated knowledge about computers and the benefit of Internet: they are
\naccustomed to take advantage of these technologies. So the academic sector has to keep pace with its
\nclients. Some experts announce a strong competition between universities and private companies in the
\ncommunication sector in the area of education, training and human-resource development in the near future.
\nSo strategic planning of universities has to take into account this challenge. On a somewhat lower level you
\nmay just realize that there are funds spent especially for the development of multi-media and telematics
\naiming a vision of over-all modernization of the academic sector – and staff as well as administration reacts
\non that. Some universities or colleges intend to disseminate their courses and study programs on the
\ninternational level. After s time of building subdivisions or study centres abroad the “virtual” university
\npromises to be the much more rational choice. Going “virtual” shall open the door to the global market for
\ntraining and education. Last but not least you may find some ingenious people which regard it a necessary or
\nat least very useful technology to improve the quality of teaching. Most often lecturers of this kind may be
\nfound in the science or the engineering departments. Traditional universities are developing schemes and
\nstrategies for “virtual” teaching and learning because they realize rapid and severe changes in relevant
\nenvironments of their systems. This is stated for the cases when a university or college does something like
\norganizational development. Often one will not find a clear analysis of the trends and changes and so
\nconsequently the strategic decisions do not seem to be very clear and well founded. Sometimes going
\n“virtual” just seems to be something fancy or modern. Saying this I do not state that these changes are fancy
\nor only something modern. What I want to point out is that many universities are lacking a clear strategic
\nplanning and management in this respect. Universities which are going to develop multi-media- and
\ntelematics-based courses and study-programs are faced to a challenge comparable with the development of
\ndistance education twenty years ago. Until now not many universities have successfully adopted modes of
\nproduction, dissemination and tuition from the distance education sector. One of the reasons for this (besides
\ncultural, pedagogical, reputation and other aspects) may be that it really means to introduce some kind of
\n“industrialized” approaches into the academic sphere (O.Peters). To some extend this must cause frictions in
\nthe academic culture as it happened with open distance learning projects \/ programs within the environment
\nof a traditional university. Even if the “virtual university” dos not only mean the prolongation of distance
\nteaching at the end of the 20th century it will lead to similar conflicts, misunderstandings and rejections.
\n52 UNESCO 2001: Creative and Inclusive Strategies for Lifelong Learning: Questions of agency and the Internet: a new way of learning.<\/em><\/span>
\n Gillian Youngs, p. 115<\/em><\/span>
\n 53 Wagner (1998)<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong>
\n\u00a0<\/i><\/span>
\nRegarding e-learning Berchtold 54 defines a hybrid phenomenon, contradicting the traditional differentiation
\nbetween \u201cgoods\u201d and \u201cservices\u201d. Given the example of recorded and filmed lectures \u2013 in fact materialised and
\nstorable and replicable services \u2013 as used in virtual and e-learning, and given the example of Computer
\nMarked Assignments via an e-learning platform, Berchtold bridged the conventional definition gap as follows:
\n\u201cService-Goods are \u2013 by utilising audiovisual and\/or automated recording and replay-techniques \u2013 storable,
\nreplicable and standardisable services as products of materialised and in advance provided human work
\nwithout requiring the renewed rendering of the original core-service by human work, whereby these servicegoods
\ncan be distributed in unlimited reproduction numbers. Service-Goods differentiate from software in the
\naspect, that they are not targeting the non-physical functional components of microprocessors and computers
\nas firm-, system- or application-software. Service-goods differentiate from goods and products regarding the
\nproperty, that their tangible and material features are not the subject of the service, but the mere carriermedium
\nfor its storage and deliberate reproduction.\u201d
\nInnovative educational approaches require critical thinking and creativity 55 – In a world undergoing rapid
\nchanges, there is a perceived need for a new vision and paradigm of higher education, which should be
\nstudent-oriented, calling in most countries for in-depth reforms and an open access policy so as to cater for
\never more diversified categories of people, and of its contents, methods, practices and means of delivery,
\nbased on new types of links and partnerships with the community and with the broadest sectors of society.
\nHigher education institutions should educate students to become well informed and deeply motivated
\ncitizens, who can think critically, analyse problems of society, look for solutions to the problems of society,
\napply them and accept social responsibilities. To achieve these goals, it may be necessary to recast
\ncurricula, using new and appropriate methods, so as to go beyond cognitive mastery of disciplines. New
\npedagogical and didactical approaches should be accessible and promoted in order to facilitate the
\nacquisition of skills, competences and abilities for communication, creative and critical analysis, independent
\nthinking and team work in multicultural contexts, where creativity also involves combining traditional or local
\nknowledge and know-how with advanced science and technology. These recast curricula should take into
\naccount the gender dimension and the specific cultural, historic and economic context of each country. The
\nteaching of human rights standards and education on the needs of communities in all parts of the world
\nshould be reflected in the curricula of all disciplines, particularly those preparing for entrepreneurship.
\nAcademic personnel should play a significant role in determining the curriculum. New methods of education
\nwill also imply new types of teaching-learning materials. These have to be coupled with new methods of
\ntesting that will promote not only powers of memory but also powers of comprehension, skills for practical
\nwork and creativity.
\nYoungs 56 discusses the role of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in changing the
\nlearning environments within which an increasing number of people around the world are operating. The
\nmain purpose is to reflect on ways in which ICTs may be considered to transform perspectives on learning in
\nways that can challenge, for example, existing hierarchies of: knowledge; control and distribution of
\ninformation; knowledge communities. It argues that ICTs deepen possibilities in both individual and collective
\ncontexts and facilitate new learning strategies, some of which are integral to the building of new linkages
\nacross political, societal and cultural boundaries.
\n54 Berchtold (2006, 65)<\/em><\/span>
\n 55 World Conference on Higher Education Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century: Vision and Action. 9 October 1998: World<\/em><\/span>
\n Declaration on Higher Education for the Twenty-first Century: Vision and Action, Article 9<\/em><\/span>
\n 56 UNESCO 2001: Creative and Inclusive Strategies for Lifelong Learning: Questions of agency and the Internet: a new way of learning.<\/em><\/span>
\n Gillian Youngs, p. 110<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

European Dimension
\nEQUIS 57 suggests a higher education provider should have a clearly articulated strategy and policies for
\ninternationalisation. It should demonstrate its commitment to educating and preparing students and
\nparticipants for management in an international environment. This should be underpinned by active
\ncollaboration with international partner institutions in fields such as student exchanges, joint programmes,
\nresearch activity and corporate connections. The provider should be able to attract students and faculty from
\nother countries. It should carry out research of international relevance and scope.
\nIn Europe distance education is a well-established form of education, although the status and tradition
\nvaries considerably within the region. In Western Europe there is a strong private sector in distance
\neducation serving the adult population. The UK Open University has set the standards for a particular type of
\nuniversity institution, the open universities. Similar institutions have been established in four other European
\ncountries (Spain, Germany. The Netherlands and Portugal). In other countries the dual mode type of
\nuniversities is the dominant model, and in recent years various consortia models have been introduced. In
\nCentral and Eastern Europe and the former USSR the political and economic transformation has important
\nimplications for education, and has already led to fundamental reforms and restructuring of national
\neducation systems. In most of the countries distance education based on correspondence studies combined
\nwith face-to-face \u2018consultations\u2019 was developed and served large populations. The UK Open University is
\nnow enrolling considerable numbers of students, particularly within business education from all over Europe,
\nincluding the former USSR. The European Union has for many years been promoting distance education,
\nparticularly with a European dimension and in cooperation between institutions in the member states. Open
\nand distance learning features strongly in policy documents from the Commission of the European
\nCommunities. 58Diversity and fragmentation in Europe goes beyond the structure and traditions of the
\neducation system.
\nHowever, according to Marleen Vanderpoorten59, legislation is one thing, shaping a true European
\nspace of higher education in practice is still another challenge. It is the richness of the Bologna Process that it
\nis not only a matter of national legislation, but increasingly also about developing shared ideas and concepts,
\nexchanging viewpoints and gradually building convergence. Vanderpoorten postulates, things have changed
\ndramatically and the pace of change still will increase in the coming years. When she looks at universities
\nthemselves, she sees many signs that they increasingly consider themselves to be operating on an
\ninternational scale, especially in research but increasingly also in teaching and learning activities. The
\nprofessional world is internationalising also at a very fast pace.
\nAccording to Don F. Westerheijden 60 the two main rationales for the Bologna Declaration (van Vught et
\nal., 2002; van der Wende, 2000) are: To increase \u2018the international competitiveness of the European system
\nof higher education\u2019 (Bologna Declaration, 1999) in the world market, we are losing the leading position to the
\nUnited States and seeing e.g. Australia and the United Kingdom becoming main higher education exporters
\nas well; and to promote mobility within Europe \u2018by overcoming obstacles\u2019 both for the graduate labour market
\nand for students during their studies.
\nMarlies Leegwater and No\u00ebl Vercruysse reflect on \u201cWorking on the European Dimension of Quality\u201d 61
\nsummarising the Bologna Process: In 1999, 31 ministers of Education or their representatives, speaking for
\n29 European countries, signed the Bologna Declaration. It aimed at promoting a structure of higher education
\nbased on two cycles, in order to create transparency for mobility and employability. Since then, throughout
\n57 The EFMD accreditation for international business schools<\/em><\/span>
\n 58 UNESCO 1997. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING. Prospects and Policy Considerations. ED-97\/WS\/52, p. 23f<\/em><\/span>
\n 59 (Westerheijden and Leegwater, 2003, 12)<\/em><\/span>
\n 60 (Westerheijden and Leegwater, 2003, 19f)<\/em><\/span>
\n 61 (Westerheijden and Leegwater, 2003, 9)<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Europe, countries with various traditions of higher education have been transforming their system actively
\ninto a transparent two-cycle (\u2018bachelor-master\u2019) structure. In each country, the transformation is laid down in
\nlaws and regulations. On the one hand, legislation is very much a national process, connected with national
\neducation systems and legal and political environments. On the other hand, transparency concerning the
\nquality of the various bachelor and master programmes requires international cooperation regarding criteria
\nfor quality. It resulted in attention for the issue of the quality of higher education at the ministerial meeting in
\nPrague, May 2001, which focussed on the follow-up of the Bologna declaration. The Prague communiqu\u00e9
\n(2001) called upon various actors: to co-operate in quality assurance; to design scenarios for mutual
\nacceptance of evaluation and accreditation\/certification mechanisms; to collaborate in establishing a common
\nframework of reference; to disseminate best practice. 62 As announced during the ministerial meeting in
\nPrague, the conference to focus on the internationalisation of quality assurance as part of the Bologna
\nprocess was organised in Amsterdam, March 2002. The aim of the conference was to present various
\ndevelopments in quality assurance of higher education and its internationalisation in Europe, also in
\nperspective of developments beyond the European higher education area. At the conference various actors
\ngave an overview of a variety of activities at various levels. 63
\nAccording to Jung 64 quality culture can be defined as an institutional culture that promotes the
\nintroduction of an internal QA system, values the capacity building for implementing QA arrangements,
\nstresses the link between the internal QA system and accountability to the public at the national and
\ninternational levels, and focuses on learning rather than teaching. The survey results show that a quality
\nculture has been emerging, if not fully integrated, in the mega universities investigated. All the mega
\nuniversities have developed and implemented QA standards and procedures in key areas of distance
\neducation activities and at least four mega universities surveyed have institutionalised a central QA unit and
\nthus sought the development of a more systematic and coherent quality culture. Another indicator for the
\nemergence of a quality culture is capacity building efforts made by the institutions. At least half of the mega
\nuniversities have provided continuous staff development opportunities to their academic and administrative
\nstaff in pursuit of quality improvement. It is found that international organisations such as UNESCO, COL,
\nOECD and World Bank have provided useful QA guidelines and resources for distance educators. Moreover,
\nmost of the institutions have shown an aspiration of obtaining national recognition as a high quality DE
\nprovider. Some have gone beyond national level accreditation and recognition and pursued international
\nrecognition such as ISO certification for their services. The Jung survey also shows that there exists a variety
\nof QA systems of distance education even though the globalisation and competitiveness of higher education
\nand the development of technology have brought distance teaching universities closer together in terms of
\ndeveloping a common quality culture. The level of QA policy integration in an overall university policy
\nframework varies across the mega universities. Some mega universities apply a set of standards and criteria
\nthat are predetermined by the institution or by the national quality assurance agency to evaluate and monitor
\nkey areas of distance education, whereas other institutions provide only general guidelines for QA and leave
\nroom for the internal and external review teams or individual units to make QA judgments. Some
\nmechanisms for assuring quality of distance education adopt rigorous internal QA measures, whereas in
\nsystems where the accountability concern does not dominate, the QA system is less centralised and the
\nprimary objective is self-improvement of institutions. Even though core areas \u2013 such as course and
\nprogramme development and delivery \u2212 for QA are similar in most mega universities, some QA areas draw
\nmore attention than others. In some institutions, assessment of staff performance and tutoring services is
\nemphasised, whereas in other institutions, learner assessment or monitoring of e-learning courses gets more
\nattention.
\n62 (Westerheijden and Leegwater, 2003, 10)<\/em><\/span>
\n 63 (Westerheijden and Leegwater, 2003, 11)<\/em><\/span>
\n 64 UNESCO\/COL 2005: QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEY OF MEGA UNIVERSITIES. Insung Jung, p. 91f<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Andr\u00e9e Sursock 65 reflects from the Higher Education Institutions\u2019 Point of View on Accreditation and Quality
\nCulture, postulating \u201cIf We All Think Alike, We Are Not Thinking\u201d. Our students today come from a variety of
\nbackgrounds and have a variety of learning needs. They differ in terms of social class, educational
\nattainment, age and goals for their education. This diversity needs to be embraced by institutions, across the
\nwhole of national systems and the European higher education area. Teachers need to be sensitive to the
\nintellectual starting point of their students and build from there. We need a variety of teaching methods and
\nteaching materials. We need to match the variety of learners with a corresponding variety of teachers. This
\ndiversity has been recognised by national quality assurance agencies in Europe that have adopted, by and
\nlarge, a fitness for purpose approach. Increased Europeanisation and internationalisation, however, could
\nlead, if we are not careful, to standardisation in the name of transparency. I shall return to the challenge of
\nEuropeanisation and internationalisation later on. For now, I would like to stress that if we want a democratic
\nsystem of higher education that ensures access for the greatest numbers, then whatever quality assurance
\nsystem we develop for the future will need to be flexible and embrace this diversity.
\nSusock 66 quotes Professor Martin Trow, who has devoted his long and distinguished academic life to
\nstudying higher education policies and demonstrated the difficulties in assessing teaching and learning in
\nhigher education. He concluded that: \u2018The real and substantial effects of the experience of higher education
\nextend over the whole lifetime of graduates, and are inextricably entwined with other forces and experiences
\nbeyond the walls and the reach of universities\u2019 (Trow, 1996). Trow suggests that we focus instead on the
\ncapacity for institutions to change: \u2018How an institution responds to change points to deep-seated qualities of
\nthe unit which must also show up in its research and teaching.\u2019
\nJulia Gonzalez Ferreras and Robert Wagenaar 67 postulate: As is understood by many nowadays,
\nuniversity authorities, university policy makers, teaching staff but above all students, higher education has
\ndeveloped from a local, regional and national issue to a European and a global issue. Young people are
\ntravelling all over the world to participate in education that fits best their abilities and objectives. They demand
\nreliable and objective information about qualification programmes on offer. This information is not only of
\nrelevance for (future) students but also for (future) employers. Both groups of stakeholders demand certainty
\nabout what a qualification, a degree, stands for in practice. The European economic area also requires an
\nintegrated European higher education area.
\nPolitics has taken its responsibility by initiating the Sorbonne-Bologna-Prague-Berlin process. A group
\nof universities has taken up the challenge by initiating the project Tuning Educational Structures in Europe.
\nSome of the emerging issues in European distance education are summarized as follows 68: The
\nproblem of matching open learning and distance education provision to the needs of human resource
\ndevelopment at national and sub-regional levels and of integrating future development with human resource
\nand education politics and strategies; the challenge of mobilizing conventional institutions of education in the
\nimplementation of open and distance learning strategies, and at the same time capitalizing on the experience
\nand resources of the many specialized distance teaching institutions; the need for innovation by both
\nconventional and distance teaching institutions concerning the effective use of new information and
\ncommunication technologies for education and training purposes, based on sound educational strategies and
\nresearch; the need for appropriate balance and synergy between national and European development
\nconcerning policies, infrastructure, quality standards and equivalence, joint development projects and
\ndelivery and support systems; the challenge of assisting the development of distance education programmes
\nand infrastructure in sub-regions where it is not sufficiently developed.
\n65 (Westerheijden and Leegwater, 2003, 42f)<\/em><\/span>
\n 66 (Westerheijden and Leegwater, 2003, 43f)<\/em><\/span>
\n 67 (Westerheijden and Leegwater, 2003, 70f)<\/em><\/span>
\n 68 UNESCO 1997. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING. Prospects and Policy Considerations. ED-97\/WS\/52, p. 24<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The World Declaration on Higher Education sees the potential and the challenge of technology 69: The rapid
\nbreakthroughs in new information and communication technologies will further change the way knowledge is
\ndeveloped, acquired and delivered. It is also important to note that the new technologies offer opportunities to
\ninnovate on course content and teaching methods and to widen access to higher learning. However, it should
\nbe borne in mind that new information technology does not reduce the need for teachers but changes their
\nrole in relation to the learning process and that the continuous dialogue that converts information into
\nknowledge and understanding becomes fundamental. Higher education institutions should lead in drawing on
\nthe advantages and potential of new information and communication technologies, ensuring quality and
\nmaintaining high standards for education practices and outcomes in a spirit of openness, equity and
\ninternational cooperation by: engaging in networks, technology transfer, capacity-building, developing
\nteaching materials and sharing experience of their application in teaching, training and research, making
\nknowledge accessible to all; creating new learning environments, ranging from distance education facilities to
\ncomplete virtual higher education institutions and systems, capable of bridging distances and developing
\nhigh-quality systems of education, thus serving social and economic advancement and democratization as
\nwell as other relevant priorities of society, while ensuring that these virtual education facilities, based on
\nregional, continental or global networks, function in a way that respects cultural and social identities; noting
\nthat, in making full use of information and communication technology (ICT) for educational purposes,
\nparticular attention should be paid to removing the grave inequalities which exist among and also within the
\ncountries of the world with regard to access to new information and communication technologies and to the
\nproduction of the corresponding resources; adapting ICT to national, regional and local needs and securing
\ntechnical, educational, management and institutional systems to sustain it; facilitating, through international
\nco-operation, the identification of the objectives and interests of all countries, particularly the developing
\ncountries, equitable access and the strengthening of infrastructures in this field and the dissemination of such
\ntechnology throughout society; closely following the evolution of the \u2018knowledge society\u2019 in order to ensure
\nhigh quality and equitable regulations for access to prevail; taking the new possibilities created by the use of
\nICTs into account, while realizing that it is, above all, institutions of higher education that are using ICTs in
\norder to modernize their work, and not ICTs transforming institutions of higher education from real to virtual
\ninstitutions.
\nOpen and Distance Education
\nThe UNESCO paper on open and distance education 70 suggests the strategies for the development of open
\nand distance learning to ideally form part of any national strategy for education and training, including the
\nharmonization of goals, an integrated and intersectoral approach is thus very important. National policy and
\nplanning should take into account possibilities for regional and international collaboration and coordination.
\nThe International University of Panama 71 provides a brief history of distance education: In 1728 The
\nBoston Gazette provided material for auto-instruction by mail. In 1840 Isaac Pitman introduced courses by
\nmail in England. In 1860 the Mining Herald in Pennsylvania provided mining education by mail. The promoter
\nTomas Foster created ICS International Correspondence Schools. At the end of the journey, in the global
\nworld, it has expanded rapidly. In the decade between 1960 and 1970 the use of radio and television has
\nbeen implemented, during the 1980 decade new technologies have entered the university studies, in the
\n1990 decade the new technologies of information and communication (ICT) have been introduced.
\n69 World Conference on Higher Education Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century: Vision and Action. 9 October 1998: World<\/em><\/span>
\n Declaration on Higher Education for the Twenty-first Century: Vision and Action, Article 12<\/em><\/span>
\n 70 UNESCO 1997. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING. Prospects and Policy Considerations. ED-97\/WS\/52, p. 30<\/em><\/span>
\n 71 http:\/\/www.interuni.us\/educacionadistancia.htm Educaci\u00f3n a Distancia<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The terms open learning and distance education represent approaches that focus on opening access to
\neducation and training provision, freeing learners from the constraints of time and place, and offering flexible
\nlearning opportunities to individuals and groups of learners. Open and distance learning is one of the most
\nrapidly growing fields of education, and its potential impact on all education delivery systems has been
\ngreatly accentuated through new developments in information and communication technologies. The
\nobjective of this paper is to review open and distance learning in the context of present challenges and
\nopportunities, examine relevant concepts and contributions, outline current global and regional trends,
\nsuggest policy and strategy considerations, and identify UNESCO\u2019s policies on open and distance learning,
\nincluding its role in capacity-building and international co-operation. It is addressed to a wide range of
\npotential partners, governments, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, specialized
\ninstitutions, associations, industrial corporations, telecommunication companies, and others interested in this
\nfield, to seek their cooperation in meeting today\u2019s urgent education and training needs, through open and
\ndistance learning. 72
\nRegarding concept and contributions the paper on Open and Distance Learning suggests that Open
\nand distance learning systems can usually be described as made up of a range of components such as: the
\nmission or goal of a particular system, programmes and curricula, teaching\/learning strategies and
\ntechniques, learning material and resources, communication and interaction, support and delivery systems,
\nstudents, tutors, staff and other experts evaluation procedures, management, housing and equipment. There
\nare both success stories and failures in open and distance learning, and many systems are struggling with
\nproblems and barriers to effective implementation. Some of the more common problems are: inadequate
\ntechnological infrastructure, planning and programme deficiencies, lack of human capacity and expertise,
\ninadequate financial resources: and lack of recognition of educational equivalence. Sometimes open and
\ndistance learning is used for school-age children and youth who are unable to attend ordinary schools. In
\ndeveloping countries, distance education for school equivalency is an important way of expanding
\neducational opportunities to the adult population. In developed countries, there is still a need for these types
\nof programmes for those who dropped out of the conventional system. Teacher training is an important area
\nwhere open and distance learning has made a major contribution. Non-formal education and community
\ndevelopment represent other sectors where open and distance learning is used. 73
\nDistance education at the tertiary level shows a two-fold development pattern. On the one hand,
\nnumerous single mode open universities have emerged to absorb large numbers of new learners, while, on
\nthe other hand, increasing numbers of traditional universities have begun to offer their programmes also
\nthrough distance education. This tends to diminish the earlier distinction between the two types of
\nuniversities. Open and distance learning has the potential to generate new patterns of teaching and learning.
\nLinked as it is with developments in information and communication technologies, it is close to the
\ndevelopment of new learning needs and new patterns of information access and application. There is
\nevidence that it can lead to innovation in mainstream education, and may even have effects beyond the
\nrealm of education itself. Open and distance learning will therefore play an especially decisive role in the
\ncreation of the global information society.
\nPresent trends in open and distance learning: Obviously, open and distance learning will be an
\nimportant element of future education and training systems. It is approaching acceptance within mainstream
\neducation and training in such a way that it will make up part of the repertoire of most educational institutions
\nin the future. This will also mean that the present distinction between \u2018conventional\u2019 education and open and
\ndistance learning will become less meaningful. One of the technological trends is the emergence of new
\nforms of distance learning based on more interactive telecommunication technologies, with pedagogical,
\n72 UNESCO 1997. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING. Executive Summary, I, p. 1<\/em><\/span>
\n 73 UNESCO 1997. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING. Executive Summary, Chapters IV-VII, p. 1f<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

economic and organizational implications. Furthermore, there is a significant trend towards
\ninternationalization. The regional overview shows great differences between all regions of the world, although
\nthere are also a number of similarities. Open and distance learning has existed for about one hundred years
\nin the more developed regions and for one or two generations in the developing regions. In industrialized
\ncountries present trends are linked both to structural problems of education in modern society, and to
\ntechnological development. The need to extend learning opportunities over the whole life span and the
\nchanging demands concerning mass education and the need for new skills represent challenges, which are
\nnot easily met by conventional structures and institutions. Information and communication technologies have
\ngreat potential impact on education, and may help in creating new patterns of education and training.
\nGovernments, industry and educational institutions are eager to develop effective applications of new
\ntechnologies and at the same time meet the needs of learners. National policy documents on education and
\ntraining should include statements on the role of open and distance learning. A successful national launch or
\nreform of open and distance learning requires visible and strong leadership and high-level government
\nbacking. Careful planning is essential. A cost effective operation is one that makes good use of all available
\nresources -it is not necessarily low cost. A distance teaching institution needs sufficient resources to be able
\nto react promptly to new demands and situations. 74
\nIn developing countries there are some common barriers to the effective implementation of open and
\ndistance learning. Lack of funding, problems of allocation of resources and sustained support; lack of human
\nresources with sufficient competence and motivation; technological infrastructure, which prevents the
\neffective use of appropriate technologies. Capacity building is important, including increased professionalism
\nin planning and management of open and distance learning systems. 75
\nThe UNESCO paper 76 provides a comprehensive summary of the concept of open and distance
\nlearning: Open learning is a term with no universally agreed definition. To some \u2018open\u2019 will indicate open
\nentry and access to learning opportunities, and the focus will be on the removal of barriers to learning
\nopportunities. To others it may include aspects of methods and organization, with the consequence that
\n\u2018open learning\u2019 may sometimes be substituted by flexible learning. Jeffries et al (1990) define open learning
\nas: \u201cAny form of learning in which the provider (e.g. an institution or organization running a training scheme)
\nenables individual learners to exercise choice over any one or more of a number of aspects of learning.
\nTypically this involves helping learners take responsibility for aspects such as what they learn, how they
\nlearn, where they learn, how quickly they learn, who to turn to for help and whether, when and where to have
\ntheir learning assessed.\u201d Distance education in most cases shares the concern for openness and flexibility,
\nbut definitions tend to focus on the possibility of communication between participants in the learning process
\nacross time and\/or space, particularly as brought about by new (and some old) technologies. Perraton
\n(1993a) describes distance education as \u201can educational process in which a significant proportion of the
\nteaching is conducted by someone removed in space and\/or time from the learner\u201d. This definition covers
\nmost of the traditional approaches to distance teaching, although it does not reflect the fact that the learners
\nare also usually dispersed in space and\/or time. This may be quite important in view of the evolving variation
\nof learning environments and patterns of communication. Distance education may involve the use of a range
\nof media, such as print, written correspondence, audio, video and computer based media and networks as
\nwell as multimedia, both for presentation of information and for communication between participants. Open
\nand distance learning is often used when one wants to address a whole range of related forms of teaching
\nand learning, without concentrating too much on exact delineation and definition. It stresses at the same time
\nopenness concerning access, organization and methods, flexibility in delivery and communication patterns,
\nand the use of various technologies in support of learning. Open and distance learning is usually contrasted
\n74 UNESCO 1997. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING. Executive Summary, Chapters VIII-XIV, p. 2f<\/em><\/span>
\n 75 UNESCO 1997. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING. Executive Summary, Chapter XV, p. 3<\/em><\/span>
\n 76 UNESCO 1997. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING, p. 10f<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

with \u2018conventional\u2019 or \u2018face-to-face\u2019 education, which may be described as the form of education which takes
\nplace in a classroom or an auditorium. However, both \u2018distance\u2019 and \u2018face-to-face\u2019 education are labels
\ncovering a wide range of variations and methods. Face-to-face education in its pure form may vary along a
\ncontinuum from one-to-one tutorials, group activities, seminars and classroom teaching to lectures for large
\naudiences. In each case different educational approaches and methods may be used. A range of media may
\nalso support face-to-face education, and it is usually combined with periods of independent study, with more
\nor less direction from the teacher and dependence on specific learning materials. In a similar way, distance
\neducation has a variety of forms, according to the choice of media, methods and organizational approaches.
\nThe original, and still most widespread form is correspondence education. Print is used as the dominant
\nlearning material, with the usual medium of communication being by correspondence. Other forms are radio
\nschools, educational television, telephone teaching, audio and video teleconferences, and computermediated
\ncommunication, Very often the media bridging the distance are combined with face-to-face
\ninteraction in working groups, seminars or lectures. This means that although there is a clear distinction in
\ntheory between distance education and conventional or face-to-face education, the distinction in practice is
\nfar from clear. This is also underlined by the fact that an increasing number of educational institutions use
\nboth conventional and distance types of methods when designing education programmes -either as
\nalternative forms (cf. the term \u2018dual mode\u2019 institution) or in a mix of the two types within the same programme
\n(sometimes called \u2018hybrid\u2019 forms). So far, various forms of distance education have been described mainly as
\na function of different media. However, media represent only one aspect of distance learning systems and
\nthere is considerable variation between them concerning other aspects. The most common distinction is
\nperhaps between \u2018single mode\u2019 and \u2018dual mode\u2019 institutions. Single mode institutions are established and
\norganized with the single purpose of offering distance education, while dual mode institutions offer both
\ndistance education and conventional forms of education within the same institution. In many cases distance
\nlearning is provided in partnership between several institutions of the same kind or by different types of
\ninstitutions with different roles. The private sector is also active, often in competition with traditional
\neducational institutions. The focus of each system will lead to significant differences as to how the various
\ncomponents and sub-systems are designed, organized and managed. This is not the place to consider the
\nstructures of different systems, but it is important to be aware of the main components common to the
\nmajority of actual systems.
\nAccording to the UNESCO paper on open and distance learning 77 The mission of a distance learning
\nsystem defines the role of the system within the specific context of education policy. It may be directed
\ntowards particular purposes, target groups, regions, sectors or levels of education and training, and led by
\nparticular values and philosophies of learning and education. Programmes and curricula make up important
\ncomponents, which define the profile of a system or an institution. Teaching and learning strategies and
\ntechniques depend partly on the type of programme and the needs they are designed to meet. But they also
\ndepend on the educational philosophy and values of the particular system, and the educational
\ncharacteristics and potential of the technologies used. Learning materials and resources make up necessary
\ncomponents in all distance-learning systems. Comprehensive, well-developed materials may greatly
\nstimulate self-learning and influence the quality of the system as a whole. Development and production of
\nmaterials is often considered as a subsystem in distance teaching organizations. Existing materials,
\ntextbooks, software etc. may be used. Communication between teachers and learners is seen as a
\nnecessary component in distance education, as in all other forms of education. Thus, self-study without any
\ncommunication and support is not usually considered to fall within the concept of distance education. Open
\nlearning systems on the other hand are often heavily based on self-study. Another crucial component is the
\ninteraction between learners. Support delivered locally is a common component. The delivery system may
\n77 UNESCO 1997. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING. Prospects and Policy Considerations. ED-97\/WS\/52, p. 11f<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

comprise both distribution of pre-packaged material, transmission of programmes, lectures etc., and systems
\nof communication\/interaction and local support. The student and tutor sub-system is often distinguished from
\nthe course materials subsystem. Staff and other experts in a distance learning system need a range of
\ndifferent competencies. Tutors have already been mentioned. A range of other experts with different
\nqualifications is also needed, either as full-time staff or as external consultants: planners, instructional
\ndesigners, developers and producers, researchers, media experts, marketing experts and administrative
\nstaff. Effective management and administration needs not only competent staff, but also well designed,
\nefficient administrative systems and routines, planning and monitoring systems, budgetary and accounting
\nsystems etc. Many of these will be quite different from the corresponding systems needed in the
\nmanagement of other forms of education. The requirements of housing and equipment may be very different
\nfrom conventional education institutions. A single mode distance learning system has no residential students,
\nand thus there is no need for classrooms, lecture theatres etc. at the central location. Such facilities may be
\nneeded locally, and are often provided in cooperation with local institutions. At the central location there will
\nbe need for production facilities and storage capacity, although some decentralized production is also
\npossible. Finally, evaluation should be a component, in order to provide information relevant to the
\nadjustment of the roles and operation of system components, and in order to secure their optimal contribution
\nand development.78
\nOpen University
\nDistance education is widely used at the tertiary level within the framework of open and distance-teaching
\nuniversities which provide programmes and degrees equivalent to conventional university and college
\neducation. Traditional universities often use the same curricula for distance and residential students, and the
\nstudents are often but not always subject to the same entrance requirements and examinations. Single mode
\nopen universities generally have their own degrees and curricula, but they are often similar to the curricula
\nand degrees of a conventional university. Degree studies in distance teaching universities thus increase the
\ncapacity of higher education systems, mainly catering for the adult population. The similarity of curricula and
\ndegree structures may be seen as a demonstration of equal quality, and makes the recognition of distance
\neducation at the tertiary level easier. The expansion of single mode open universities, many of which have
\ndeveloped to \u2018megauniversities\u2019 with more than 100.000 students (ICDL, 1995) on one hand, and the
\ntransformation of traditional universities to dual mode universities on the other, are important contributions to
\nthe diversification and development of higher education systems. The increasing tendency of traditional
\nuniversities to deliver their programmes also through distance education appears to diminish the earlier
\ndistinction between the two types of universities. 79
\nAccording to Jung 80 Mega universities (i.e. those with over 100,000 students) are among the most
\nimportant providers of distance education worldwide and are increasingly using ICT-based learning. Until
\nrecently they placed more emphasis on widening access than assuring quality, but now they recognise
\nquality assurance as a key issue that needs to be addressed not only within individual universities but also
\njointly and in the global context. Over the past few decades, there has been a noticeable growth in distance
\neducation (DE) around the world. More than 10 mega universities have been developed to meet the
\nincreasing educational needs of adults and lifelong learners.1 A mega university is defined as \u201ca distance
\nteaching institution with over 100,000 active students in degreelevel courses\u201d (Daniel, 1996: 29). In parallel
\nwith the development of mega universities, cross-border DE has grown. Moreover, many conventional DE
\ninstitutions have begun to introduce information and communication technology (ICT) mainly as
\n78 UNESCO 1997. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING. Prospects and Policy Considerations. ED-97\/WS\/52, p. 12<\/em><\/span>
\n 79 UNESCO 1997. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING. Prospects and Policy Considerations. ED-97\/WS\/52, p. 15<\/em><\/span>
\n 80 UNESCO\/COL 2005: QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEY OF MEGA UNIVERSITIES. Insung Jung, p. 80-90<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

supplementary modes of instruction. Some institutions including a few mega universities have created elearning
\nprogrammes. These trends challenge the existing quality assurance (QA) frameworks of DE, which
\nhave focused more on widening access than on assuring quality, and often do not address for-profit and
\ncross-border education. Especially in the context of growing globalisation in distance education, there has
\nbeen an urgent need for international initiatives to review quality assurance mechanisms of DE for higher
\neducation at the national and institutional level, discuss new challenges of a changing DE environment, and
\nbuild a capacity for QA to enhance the quality provision in a globalised higher education market. QA in mega
\nuniversities is considered to be especially important since those mega universities provide higher education
\nto millions of students around the world with collaboration or in competition with for-profit or cross-border
\nproviders. QA policies and regulations have been set in all the institutions surveyed. However, the degree of
\nelaboration in those policies and regulations and the level of integration with the general university policy
\nframework and the national QA framework vary across the institutions. A variety of QA methods are observed
\nin the mega universities. The popular methods of QA include providing a wide range of opportunities for
\ntraining workshops, conducting evaluation research, introducing internal review processes, and inviting
\nexternal audits and assessments. The mega universities surveyed have developed QA criteria for key areas
\nof distance education. Detailed QA criteria are provided for several of the mega universities surveyed. It
\nappears that the quality assurance of the cross-border operations and e-learning practices is still in the initial
\nstages of development in most of the mega universities. However, the institutions seem to recognise the
\nneed for special attention to QA systems for those new challenges.
\nThe challenge is to provide for sustainable globalisation of transnational higher education TNHE.
\nBerchtold defines \u201cSustainable Globalisation as a system of global trade of goods and services, including
\nfinancial services and transactions, and the free travel of people, exchange of cultures and the flow of
\ninformation and knowledge (data-capital) around the world, including the internet, and the development of a
\ncosmopolitan culture that meets the needs of the global requirements for the functioning of that worldwide
\nsystem, without endangering and compromising the current and future needs and generic and indigenous
\ninfrastructures, cultures, societies and communities at local, regional and national level.\u201d 81
\nDevelopment is conceived by Spooner 82 \u201cgenerally to include all modern planning and project
\nimplementation which is designed to increase productivity, to modernize traditional systems, and to raise
\nliving standards. Bode 83 demands that a just globalisation policy must integrate fighting poverty, security
\npolicy and environmental policy. According to US-President Obama \u201cthe challenges of the 21st century
\ncannot be met without collective action. (\u2026) I’ve spoken often, at home, about a new era of responsibility. I
\nbelieve strongly that this era must not end at our borders. In a world that is more and more inter-connected,
\nwe have a responsibility to work together to solve common challenges.\u201d 84 \u201cThe fundamental facts that
\nbrought about cooperation, society, and civilization and transformed the animal man into a human being are
\nthe facts that work performed under the division of labour is more productive than isolated work and that
\nman\u2019s reason is capable of recognizing this truth. The principle of the division of labour is one of the great
\nbasic principles of cosmic becoming and evolutionary change.\u201d 85 \u201cWhen social cooperation is intensified by
\nenlarging the field in which there is division of labour or when legal protection and the safeguarding of peace
\nare strengthened, the incentive is the desire of all those concerned to improve their own conditions. In striving
\nafter his own\u2014rightly understood\u2014interests the individual works toward an intensification of social
\ncooperation and peaceful intercourse. Society is a product of human action, i.e., the human urge to remove
\n81 Gerhard Berchtold, 2009, Sustainable Globalisation<\/em><\/span>
\n 82 Spooner (1984)<\/em><\/span>
\n 83 Bode, Thilo (2003)<\/em><\/span>
\n 84 Barack Obama, US President at the G-20 Summit, London, April 2009<\/em><\/span>
\n 85 Mises, 1949, 1996, p. 144f<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

uneasiness as far as possible.\u201d 86 \u201cSociety always involves men acting in cooperation with other men in order
\nto let all participants attain their own ends.\u201d 87 James Martin 88 provides a vital blueprint for ensuring our
\nfuture, calling it humanity\u00b4s grandest challenge that a vital task for the 21st century is to cope with the
\navalanche we have started, and its consequences for today\u00b4s young people living at a time of extraordinary
\nopportunities and immense problems \u2013 his main theme to be taught and talked about everywhere: that the
\n21st century is unique in human history in that it will produce a great transition that enables humanity to
\nsurvive. Edgar Morin 89 draws the two great ethical-political objectives of the new millenium: to establish a
\nrelationship of mutual control between the society and the individuals by means of democracy; and to
\ncomplete the planetary community. In continuation of anthropoethics the planetary community of fate can
\ncreate common awareness and joint consciousness of mankind in solidarity of the human species. Mankind
\nis no longer just a biological term without roots, but with a home \u2013 earth, being endangered \u2013 and mankind is
\na reality as a collective community of fate, aware that we are all global citizens.<\/p>\n

References<\/span><\/strong>
\n Alatas, Syed Farid (2006), “From Jami`ah to University: Multiculturalism and Christian\u2013Muslim Dialogue”, Current Sociology 54 (1)<\/span>
\n Aust et.al. (2007) Wettlauf um die Welt. Piper Verlag. M\u00fcnchen-Z\u00fcrich.<\/span>
\n Berchtold, G. (2006) \u201eProjekt Worldwide University WWU\u201c. Joseph Schumpeter Institut Wels<\/span>
\n Berchtold, G. (2008), Transnational Higher Education. Development and Management. Universidad Atzeca<\/span>
\n Berchtold, G. (2009) \u201eSustainable Globalisation\u201c. Universidad Azteca. Flopitec, Granada, ISBN 978-84-6 12-8474-0 in Perspectives on<\/span>
\n Globalization, Development and Public Policy. Editors: Austin N. Nosike, Gerhard Berchtold, Shobana Nelasco.<\/span>
\n Bhagwati, Jagdish (2004). In Defense of Globalisation. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.<\/span>
\n Bode, Thilo (2003) Die Demokratie verr\u00e4t ihre Kinder. Deutsche Verlagsanstalt. Stuttgart, M\u00fcnchen<\/span>
\n Bump, Jerome (2008-11-08 download) The Origin of Universities, University of Texas at Austin<\/span>
\n Chomsky, Noam (1994, 2004) Neue Weltordnungen. Vom Kolonialismus zum Big Mac. (1994: World Orders Old and New. American<\/span>
\n University. Cairo) 2004: Europa-Verlag, Leipzig.<\/span>
\n CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC, AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION, Adopted in London on<\/span>
\n 16 November 1945 and amended by the General Conference at its second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth,<\/span>
\n twelfth, fifteenth, seventeenth, nineteenth, twentieth, twenty-first, twenty-fourth, and twenty-fifth sessions.<\/span>
\n Croucher, Sheila L. (2004) Globalisation and Belonging: The Politics of Identity in a Changing World. Rowman & Littlefield.<\/span>
\n Daniel, John (2002) Assistant Director-General for Education for UNESCO, Paris, at the First Global Forum on International Quality<\/span>
\n Assurance, Accreditation and the Recognition of Qualifications in Higher Education \u201cGLOBALISATION AND HIGHER<\/span>
\n EDUCATION\u201d, on the topic \u201cAUTOMOBILES, BANANAS, COURSES, DEGREES\u2026An ABC of Higher Education and<\/span>
\n Globalisation\u201d, 17 October 2002<\/span>
\n Diamond, Jarred (2005) Collapse \u2013 How Societies Choose to Fail or Survive. Penguin Books. London.<\/span>
\n EFMD CEL – Programme accreditation for teChnology-Enhanced Learning: http:\/\/www.efmd.org\/html\/Accreditations\/cont _detail.asp?<\/span>
\n id=040929dygl&aid=041027wszf&tid=1&ref=ind<\/span>
\n Encarta World English Dictionary(1999) Bloomsbury, New York<\/span>
\n Friedman, Thomas L. (2006) The World is Flat. Penguin. London<\/span>
\n International University (2006) http:\/\/www.interuni.us\/educacionadistancia.htm Educaci\u00f3n a Distancia<\/span>
\n Makdisi, George (April-June 1989), “Scholasticism and Humanism in Classical Islam and the Christian West”, Journal of the American<\/span>
\n Oriental Society 109 (2)<\/span>
\n Martin, James (2006) The Meaning of the 21st Century. A Vital Blueprint for Ensuring Our Future. Transworld Publishers. London<\/span>
\n Mises, von L. (1949, 1996) \u201cHuman Action\u201d. Fourth edition copyright 1996 by Bettina B. Greaves (Irvington: Foundation for Economic<\/span>
\n Education, 1996), who gave her kind permission for this online edition. George Reisman prepared the .pdf files, which<\/span>
\n correspond to the fourth edition text. For the fully restored First Edition (1949), see THE SCHOLAR’S EDITION,. which is the print<\/span>
\n edition published by the Mises Institute. http:\/\/www.mises.org\/humanaction.asp<\/span>
\n 86 Mises, 1949, 1996, p. 146<\/span>
\n 87 Mises, 1949, 1996, p. 169f<\/span>
\n 88 James Martin (2006)<\/span>
\n 89 Morin, Edgar (2001) Die sieben Fundamente des Wissens f\u00fcr eine Erziehung der Zukunft.<\/span>
\n ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012<\/span>
\n 68<\/span>
\n Morin, Edgar (2001) Die sieben Fundamente des Wissens f\u00fcr eine Erziehung der Zukunft. K\u00e4rmer. Hamburg. [Les sept savoir<\/span>
\n n\u00e9cessaires \u00e0 l\u00b4\u00e9ducation du futur.1999 UNESCO. Paris.]<\/span>
\n Obama, Barack (2009) prepared text of remarks by U.S. President Barack Obama following the Group of 20 summit, as released by the<\/span>
\n White House. London. 2 April 2009.<\/span>
\n Saavedra Hidalgo, R.R., Berchtold G. (2011) M\u00e9xico y la Uni\u00f3n Europea una nueva interacci\u00f3n educativa: Criterios europeos para<\/span>
\n Evaluar la Calidad en E-learning y la transferencia de cr\u00e9ditos ECTS. \u00c1rea tem\u00e1tica: Iniciativas multilaterales y gubernamentales<\/span>
\n para la innov@ci\u00f3n en educaci\u00f3n y formaci\u00f3n. Universidad Azteca.<\/span>
\n Siles Levy Consultar\u00eda (2003) INFORME FINAL. Estudios Normas Juridicas. Elaborado por: Carlos Siles Levy. Managua, 10 de<\/span>
\n septiembre de 2003<\/span>
\n Spooner, Brian (1984) Ecology in Development: A Rationale for Three-Dimensional Policy. (Source Website:<\/span>
\n http:\/\/www.unu.edu\/unupress\/unupbooks\/80458e\/80458E0b.htm) \u00a9 The United Nations University, 1984. NRTS-21\/UNUP-458.<\/span>
\n ISBN 92-808-0458-8<\/span>
\n UNESCO 1997. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING. Prospects and Policy Considerations. ED-97\/WS\/52<\/span>
\n Unesco 2001: Creative and Inclusive Strategies for Lifelong Learning: Report of International Roundtable 27 \u2013 29 November 2000<\/span>
\n Editors: Gillian Youngs, University of Leicester (UK), Toshio Ohsako & Carolyn Medel-A\u00f1onuevo, UNESCO Institute for<\/span>
\n Education UNESCO Institute for Education, Hamburg, Germany, 2001<\/span>
\n UNESCO 2005a: Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-border Higher Education. Paris, 2005 Chief, Section for Reform, Innovation<\/span>
\n and Quality Assurance, Division of Higher Education Internet: http:\/\/www.unesco.org\/education\/hed\/guidelines Published by the<\/span>
\n United Nations Educational, Scientifi c and Cultural Organization. Composed and printed in the workshops of UNESCO. \u00a9<\/span>
\n UNESCO 2005. Printed in France. (ED-2005\/WS\/76)<\/span>
\n UNESCO\/COL 2005: PERSPECTIVES ON DISTANCE EDUCATION. Lifelong Learning & Distance Higher Education Vis Naidoo and<\/span>
\n Heba Ramzy, Editors. Christopher McIntosh, Editor. Zeynep Varoglu, Editorial Coordinator. Commonwealth of Learning \/<\/span>
\n UNESCO Publishing \u00a9 UNESCO\/COL 2005. ISBN 1-894975-21-9<\/span>
\n United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (2002) \u201cFirst Global Forum on International Quality Assurance,<\/span>
\n Accreditation and the Recognition of Qualifications in Higher Education. \u201cGlobalisation and Higher Education\u201d FINAL REPORT.\u201d<\/span>
\n UNESCO, Paris. (ED-2002\/WS\/47) UNESCO, Paris, 17 – 18 October 2002 ED-2002\/HED\/AMQ\/GF.1\/11 (17 December 2002)<\/span>
\n UNESCO 2005a: Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-border Higher Education<\/span>
\n United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Organisation des Nations Unies pour l\u2019\u00e9ducation, la science et la culture<\/span>
\n Organizaci\u00f3n de las Naciones Unidas para la Educaci\u00f3n, la Ciencia y la Cultura Recommendation on the Recognition of Studies<\/span>
\n and Qualifications in Higher Education adopted by the General Conference at its twenty-seventh session Paris, 13 November<\/span>
\n 1993 Recommandation sur la reconnaissance des \u00e9tudes et des titres de l’enseignement sup\u00e9rieur adopt\u00e9e par la Conf\u00e9rence<\/span>
\n g\u00e9n\u00e9rale \u00e0 sa vingt-septi\u00e8me session Paris, 13 novembre 1993 Recomendaci\u00f3n sobre la convalidaci\u00f3n de los estudios, t\u00edtulos y<\/span>
\n diplomas de ense\u00f1anza superior aprobada por la Conferencia General en su 27a. reuni\u00f3n Par\u00eds, 13 de noviembre de 1993<\/span>
\n UNEP-ETU and IISD (2000) Environment and Trade. A Handbook. The United Nations Environment Programme. Division of<\/span>
\n Technology, Industry and Economics. Economics and Trade Unit. And the International Institute for Sustainable Development,<\/span>
\n IISD Copyright \u00a9 2000 United Nations Environment Programme, International Institute for Sustainable Development Published by<\/span>
\n the International Institute for Sustainable Development. Canada ISBN 1-895536-21-9 http:\/\/www.unep.ch\/etu and<\/span>
\n http:\/\/iisd.ca\/trade\/handbook<\/span>
\n United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 1998 The Use of Electronic Media in Open Learning and Distance<\/span>
\n Education \/ prepared by My Von Euler and David Berg. – Paris: UNESCO, 1998. – iv, 51 p. ; 30cm. – (CIIANF-98\/WS\/ 13) Original<\/span>
\n : English CII\/INF-98\/WS\/13. September 1998<\/span>
\n Universal Declaration of Human Rights (www3.itu.int\/udhr)<\/span>
\n US Government website: US Department of State: Types of Graduate schools<\/span>
\n http:\/\/www.ed.gov\/admins\/finaid\/accred\/accreditation_pg10.html#TitleIVRecognition<\/span>
\n Wagner, E., (1998) Creating a Virtual University in a Traditional Environment. EDEN Conference, Proceedings of the 7th European<\/span>
\n Distance Education Network, University of Bologna, Italien, 24. – 26- Juni 1998<\/span>
\n Westerheijden, D.F., Leegwater, M. (Eds.) (2003) \u201eWorking on the European Dimension of Quality. Report on the conference on quality<\/span>
\n assurance in higher education as part of the Bologna process, Amsterdam, 12-13 March 2002.\u201d Ministry of Education, Culture<\/span>
\n and Sciences, Zoetermeer<\/span>
\n Wikipedia: http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/w\/index.php?title=University&printable=yes retrieved from<\/span>
\n Google eBook of Encyclopedia Britannica<\/span>
\n World Declaration on Higher Education for the Twenty-first Century: Vision and Action and Framework for Priority Action for Change and<\/span>
\n Development in Higher Education adopted by the World Conference on Higher Education Higher Education in the Twenty-First<\/span>
\n Century: Vision and Action 9 October 1998 http:\/\/portal.unesco.org\/education\/en\/ev.php-<\/span>
\n URL_ID=19193&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html Framework for Priority Action for Change and Development in<\/span>
\n Higher Education adopted by the<\/span>
\n World Conference on Higher Education, 9 October 1998 http:\/\/portal.unesco.org\/education\/en\/ev.php-URL_ID=7152&URL_DO<\/span>
\n =DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html World Declaration and Framework for Priority Action for Change and Development in<\/span>
\n Higher Education adopted by the World Conference on Higher Education, 9 October 1998.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Dr.Mehmet Birekul, 2018<\/strong><\/p>\n ","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

ISSN 2039\u20102117 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3 (4) January 2012 41 E-Activity and Technology in a Changing Environment Gerhard Berchtold Universidad Azteca, Chalco (Mexico) Introduction The second half of the last century will go down in the history of higher education as the period of its most spectacular expansion: an over sixfold increase…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":3517,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[7,1,9],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mbirekul.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3513"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mbirekul.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mbirekul.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mbirekul.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mbirekul.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3513"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.mbirekul.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3513\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mbirekul.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/3517"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mbirekul.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3513"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mbirekul.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=3513"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mbirekul.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=3513"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}