Belarusian Higher Education: Readiness to EHEA Admission. Alternative Report

---

Альтернативный доклад: Беларусское высшее образование. Готовность к включению в ЕПВО

Альтэрнатыўны даклад: Беларуская вышэйшая адукацыя. Гатоўнасць да ўключэння ў ЕПВА

"Дорожная карта": План действий по включению Беларуси в Европейское пространство высшего образования

Road Map for Reforms: Actions plan on Belarus admission to Bologna

---

 

DETAILS REGARDING THE APPLICANT

Country: Belarus

Date of report submission: December 9, 2011

Contact person/Position: Belarusian Independent Bologna Committee

E-mail address: 

Contributors to the report: Vladimir Dounaev, Svetlana Matskevich, Yuliya Lakina, Natalia Artsiomenka, Others

 

I. OVERVIEW OF THE NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM

1. Please describe the national higher education system including a) an outline of the main regulatory documents b) the governance arrangements of the system (main regulatory bodies, their competences and interactions) c) the institutional structure underpinning the national higher education system (number and types of institutions, student enrolment and academic staff structure).

2. Please give a description of the strategies that your country is currently pursuing in the field of higher education.

3. What are the partnership arrangements underpinning the system? Is there any specificity of your national higher education system that needs highlighting?

4. What are the main challenges that the national higher education system in your country is facing?

5. Why does your country want to join the EHEA?

New Education Code came in force in September 2011 and became the primary legislation regulating higher education affairs in Belarus. New Code’s adoption brought to the end Belarusian higher education self-imposed isolation from European higher education reforms processes.

Belarusian higher education system is father away from Europe than it was in 2004. The first attempts to join Bologna dated back to earlier 2000 when higher education legislation had been in developing stage to incorporate Bologna principles and European higher education key values. In 2002 pilot 2 cycle educational model Bachelor – Master was legalized in new edition of Law on Education. During that time, Belarus adopted rules of procedures on Higher Education degrees approved by the Council of Ministers in 2002. The Council of Ministers decision  #605 on 2-cycle educational model incorporation into higher education system was published in May 2004 allowing speeding up higher education internationalization.  Belarus signs Council of Europe/UNESCO Lisbon Convention on qualification recognition in 2002. In June 2004 Belarusian Parliament approved new ‘Law on Higher Education’ legalizing new 2-cycle degree structure. This legal act also defined the framework for adhering to key European higher education values: academic freedom and universities autonomy. However, later in 2004 Belarus turned away from further Europeanization and fell into self-imposed isolation. This was official reaction to growing students’ oppositionism claimed to be the result of western influence.  All internationalization and liberalization processes were suspended. In those conditions, Educational Establishments, promoting European higher education fundamental values were forced to close or move out of the country. The best illustration of that is closure of European Humanities University (EHU) in Minsk and its move to neighboring Lithuania. EHU could be considered the only university in exile in peaceful time.  2004 Law on Higher Education was returned to be reworked in accordance with President’s order. A.Lukashenko announced that Belarusian higher education system doesn’t need any reform that restored old soviet era structure. This state policy on higher education was legalized by an approval of ‘Law on Higher Education’ in 2007. All articles on academic freedom and universities autonomy were eliminated. The Education Code in force reconfirmed the state adherence to administrative control of education. The Code doesn’t fall within the European education traditions and culture. Its authors undertook another attempt to create Belarusian version of education law but failed on the same grounds as such legal field failed in Soviet Union. The new legislation doesn’t eliminate higher education administrative control and its further politicizing. It seems that educational code authors and legislators didn’t plan to free education from total state control but rather decided to eliminate any sign of  autonomy.

The new Code doesn’t even define institutional autonomy and academic freedom in its scope. While conducting this research and comparing the educational policies in new Code and  1998 model Code recommended to be used by CIS countries, we found that Belarusian legislators completely disregarded the main achievement of democratic society – institutional autonomy and academic freedom. The need to eliminate and signs of democracy from educational process seems to become an emergency resulting in Parliamentary decision to cancel the Article 34 on Institutional autonomy and Academic freedom of Law on Higher Education in November 2009.  The 2007 Law on Education, the only legal act referring to institutional autonomy and academic freedom, was to be short lived and the words itselves about freedom didn’t constitute any barrier to continue repressions and oppressions in HEIs. The urgency with which government has been erasing the last reference to fundamental academic values shows that Belarusian higher education development strategies incompatible with European policies towards common educational area.

Education Code chapter on higher education stripped academic community of any instruments allowing them to influence university management processes and decision-making. This also demonstrates legislators’ adherence to making HEIs as a part of state structure. HEI Council no longer elects the key university leadership position, Rector, and he/she doesn’t report to academic community on his/her achievements. Any Rector is appointed and dismissed by the President in state sector while the private sector it is under the competence of the Ministry of Education. Unfortunately, current law doesn’t provide any protection from state oppression for Rectors themselves .  

The absence of institutional autonomy gives way to further higher education politicizing as well as prosecution of its opponents. Article 2 of the Code prohibits any political party or other public associations pursuing political agenda establishment and functioning at HEIs. In reality, the situation is different. Pro-government political organizations such as Belarusian National Youth Union (BNYU) and National Public Association Belaya Rus (NPA Belaya Rus) monopolized HEIs. BNYU is an exact copy of Soviet era komsomol and  is funded by the state. They practice the forceful and under threats to be expelled from the university recruitment of its members among students as well as claim  full control of students’ life there. The situation where the National Students Association is BNYU subdivision and consolidates its primary units can hardly correspond to universities’ democratic norms.

NPA Belaya Rus is on the way to become pro-Presidential political party but still continues its presence at HEIs. They apply the same as BNYU recruitment technique-administrative force under the threat. As a rule, HEIs Vice-Rectors are heads of the organization’s branch at respective HEI.

Human rights activists noted rising number of cases when faculty and staff who are associated with other political movement or independent NGO were forced to resign from their respective organizations under threat of losing their jobs. Faculty may be punished for taking part in any peaceful actions against current political regime, publishing articles in independent media or working for independent NGO.

New Education Code provides new ways to prosecute state policies opponents. Article 51 of new code introduces new limitations in faculty employment and this strikes by its excessiveness.  We understand that students must be protected against violent faculty with criminal record but why to extend it beyond those who have no rights to teach by court order. In situations, where the association with non-registered NGO can lead to criminal charges and jail term in accordance with Criminal Code’s Article 193.1 it is easy to fall into category to who the teaching is prohibited.

The other well-known feature of Belarusian higher education is administrative pressure on students associated with alternative to BNYU youth organizations and active participants of mass peaceful actions. They are facing the administrative actions against them from HEIs management. The vivid example of such actions was the universities reaction on the actions after December 19, 2010 Presidential election when at about 70 students complained to human rights defenders groups stating the threat of being expelled from the University for its active positions as a main issue. Many of those students served jail terms on administrative charges.  During past year, 40 students were expelled from HEIs on political ground. They were given an opportunity to continue their education in Poland within the framework of K.Kalinovsky program established by Polish government for politically oppressed Belarusian students as well as through other programs of  other  European countries. As a reaction to HEIs actions against students, EU included 5 university Rectors into the list for EU travel ban.

Another example of higher education politicizing is advance election voting procedure. Independent media and civil monitoring platforms witnessed numerous cases of forceful earlier voting in all Belarusian HEIs in the period of December 13-19, 2010. HEIs administration demanded earlier voting from all its students or their confirmation acknowledging the bulletin receipt under the threat to be expelled, stipend withdrawn or denying dormitory accommodation, which is 10 times less expensive than renting an apartment.  Such practice is not something new the authority use. It has also been used in the past. Having this in mind, this is important to point out that HEIs faculty and staff take part in such actions simply because they have no guarantees and legal form of defending themselves against the Ministry of Education and HEIs leadership oppression.  This can be only changed with changes in primary legislation on education that is supposed to provide legal mechanism to defend them against injustice.

Public participation in higher education management must be real. The first step towards higher education de-politicizing and limiting administrative control should be the process of strengthening institutional autonomy and in particular, returning to the transparent   Rector’s election and his/her accountability to academic society.

Belarusian higher education is becoming a victim of state educational policies directed towards constant funding decrease. Higher education strategy is to move its costs to public shoulders. The students’ population growth has been achieved through the official introduction of tuition fee in higher education that increased  the number of students from 189,000 in 1989-1990 to 442,900 in 2011/2012. Currently 2/3 of students are paying for their higher education. Number of students on state funded place is 149,000 that is significantly less than it was at the end of soviet era.  Private HEIs has been discriminated against state ones. In mid 90^th it was 22 and nowadays it is only 10. The tuition paying students growth is achieved by decrease in the number of state funded places. Aging technical equipment, low faculty salary, readiness to scarify education quality to attract more financial resources is the price that HEIs pay to be afloat in condition of constant education budget cuts.

The announced decision to join Bologna is reasoned by economic factors to some extent. Besides deep economic crisis, Belarus has entered deep demographic recession visible in 2^nd and 3^rd decade of this century what will affect higher education financial resources to greater extent.

Belarusian Ministry of Education plans to fight the demographic recession by increasing educational services export. In order to attract foreign students, the Ministry plans that admission to Bologna will be the way to resolve this situation without launching any complex higher education system reforms. That was why President agreed for this move. Belarusian academia views Bologna accession as a source to gain access to additional research funding and broader mobility options. Unfortunately, society as well as government doesn’t clearly understand that joining Bologna would rather mean opening a window for new ways to provide quality education in post-industrial era than just standards and higher education structure harmonization or academic mobility.

 

II. STRUCTURAL REFORMS

The EHEA is built on three structural components: quality assurance, degree structures/qualifications frameworks and the recognition of qualifications. This part of the questionnaire covers each area.

1. Degree structure system / Qualifications Frameworks / Employability

A. Please describe the higher education degree system/qualifications framework of your country. Specifically, please describe how this relates to the overarching framework of qualifications of the European Higher Education Area1 (QF-EHEA) adopted by Ministers in 2005 as well as the further procedure2 and timetable for self certifying your national framework against the QF-EHEA. The description should specify whether any study programs are exempted from the three tier structure and, if so, describe their position in your higher education system and indicate the proportion of the student body concerned.

The Belarusian model of 2-cycle higher educational structure is extremely artificial. The traditional lengthy educational cycle inherited by the country from Soviet Union was named as the 1^st educational level. The duration of study is between 4 and 6 years pending the specializations’ complexity. Second level is referred to Master level (MA) which constituted the 1^st year of doctoral program until the new Code on Education came in force in September 2011. The Code defines MA is professional and academic qualification but actual qualification requirements and criteria are not developed. In fact, the existing degrees system is simple application of the European structure over the existing one without competences differentiation set by Dublin Descriptors.

Educational standards approved by the Ministry of Education in 2007 and in following years for a number of 1^st level specializations clear constitute the ones for II level of  Dublin Descriptors or VII level of EQF . Artificially created 2^nd level of higher education still doesn’t have its professional qualification standards.

Regarding academic qualification, Belarusian Ph.D. program equals to the 3^rd level of higher education in accordance with the international treaties between countries involved (for example Poland). In Belarus the responsibilities for professional and academic qualification are divided between Ministry of Education - higher education and academic qualification falls under the High Attestation Committee responsibilities.  These responsibilities division remains unchanged under the new Code on Education what questions the Belarusian government declaration about 3-cycle higher education system. Academic qualification program falls under administrative vertical and Presidential control. The current system introduces a mechanism for limiting academic community rights during researchers’ attestation and ideological control of the actual dissertation context reasoning such actions by the need to increase the research quality. It resulted in significant decrease in a number of approved dissertations in social and humanities fields (i.e. the dissertations were defended in HEIs or Research Institutes but were not approved by High Attestation Committee).

The subjects learned through educational programs for adults are not recognized when pursing higher education study.

All educational programs and specializations offered to students by HEIs and approved by the Ministry of Education are included into the National Classifier “Specializations and Qualifications”. HEIs specializations selection limitation doesn’t allow them to design innovative interdisciplinary programs and to react on research outcomes and labor market demands. Besides, 80% of each offered educational program content is imposed by the Ministry of Education designed and approved in accordance with their own rules and requirements. The Ministry also regulates the learning outcomes and practical skills that each graduates should possess upon completion of the program as well as it regulates what disciplines should be taught at particular program including the number of hours allocated to each of them. HEIs role in developing educational programs comes down to obtaining the Ministry’s permission to offer educational programs in chosen specializations, developing teaching methodology for 80% of mandatory and strongly regulated disciplines and developing the remaining 20% program content called ‘institutional component’. In fact, students studying at the same specializations but in different HEIs obtain the same knowledge and skills without taking into account different students’ groups’ demands and capabilities, which should play an important role in mass education. Programs’ unification leads to ineffective students capabilities utilization along with quality of education decrease. This can be changed only through the degrees structure reforms. The real 3 cycle educational model built on the Dublin Descriptors and EQF must be in place. In addition to this, HEIs and potential graduates employers should have the rights to develop educational programs independently and in close cooperation with each other. This will allow linking educational standards with students’ groups’ capabilities and demands and laboring market needs.

B. The development of the national qualifications framework is, among other things, closely linked to the concern for improving the employability of higher education graduates. Please provide a description of your policies and priorities for improving the employability of higher education graduates and, in doing so, please cover the public as well as the private sector of the labor market. Please address the extent to which first cycle degrees (Bachelors or equivalent) are considered for employment, with specific reference to both the public and the private sector.

The government decides on the economy needs in human resources in a light of specializations projected for 10 years period. This influences the decision on opening and closing one or the other specialization and number of place funded by state at HEIs.

In Belarus, graduates, studied on state funded places, fall into the category of population that still under the influence of anti-constitutional practice of young specialists mandatory work placements. The mandatory work placement is easy and simple answer to starving for specialists state funded economic areas where the others refuse to go to work due to low pay and poor work conditions. Thus, mandatory work placements can be viewed as state compensation for its failed social policy. This practice is considered illegal in many countries and violates the basic constitutional rights for free education in Belarus. The agreements for such placements are obtained under force and threat to repay the cost of education to the state. This also violates Article 41 and 49 of the Constitution of Belarus, Article 13 of the Labor Code and breaches international treaties to which Belarus is signatory.

Mandatory placement duration of 2 years corresponds to legal term ‘ forced work’ which means that ‘ any work or services demanded from an individual under punishment threat and to what an individual doesn’t agree voluntarily ‘ in accordance with Article 2 para 1 of ILO Convention #29 and constitutes students rights violation. Paradox of this situation is that tuition paid graduates who do not have mandatory work placements become victims of this rules and discriminated against other category because the Code on Education doesn’t place them into the ‘young specialists’ category. The Code applies this term to those who were enrolled to the full-time study at state funded places resulting in violation of other graduates constitutional right for the first employment place and incompatible with European practices in defending graduates rights (work place quotes, defense against unfair dismissal, etc.).

2. Quality assurance

A. For internal quality assurance, describe whether higher education institutions in your country have quality assurance arrangements in place and, if not, what the plans and timetable are in this regard.

The  Code on Education sets the national framework for accessing Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) quality  (Chapter 12, Articles 115, 116) in particular state control of the process, and institutional self-assessment. The quality assurance process, its objectives and expected outcomes are regulated by secondary binding legal. At present, the internal quality assurance is conducted in accordance with the  National standard on quality management system STB ISO 9001 adapted in 2009 and based on the ISO 2001 principles approved by ENQA.

The rules of procedures in force define the milestones in the process and assign the control functions to the respective state bodies. They are also in line with general European standards and guidelines for quality assurance while their application is somewhat different.

The Ministry of Education states that all HEIs adopted the quality management system, however, in reality there are a number of them who still haven’t introduced it. The current system is not adapted to the universities conditions. The system implementation is not supported by the respective state certification authorities as the latter applies the practice common for industrial sector rather then for educational. IWA recommendations do not simplify the process. They simply provide justification and explanation related to variety of standards applying to educational establishment. These unclear guidelines and undeveloped procedures resulted in increased number of HEIs internal reviews.

At the same time, the officials do not point out that  national specializations standards (educational program standards), which provide detailed description of learning outcomes and competences that each graduate should posses upon completion the study program exist but the mechanisms to assess the learning outcomes and competences have not been developed. The final exam still have more theoretical angle and final project is concentrated on very narrow problems thus leaving the learning outcomes outside of process. 

Assessment of students

The new Code provides the general framework for students’ assessment (Chapter 40) while the Ministry of Education approves the rules of procedures to assess students learning outcomes. This includes the clearly defined testing and examination processes.  The Ministry of Education claims that the existing grading system (the scale from 1 to 10) represents the most differentiated learning outcomes assessment. Unfortunately, there is no detailed requirements and base supporting this grading system. Grading system application analysis has not been conducted thus putting the faculty requirements for assessing students’ learning outcomes unification into jeopardizing situation. The objectiveness of grading scale can’t be access either. It influences the teaching quality assessment that directly linked to the grades level. This approach completely breaches the ECTS grades use guidelines. Thus, the existing grading system  doesn’t provide adequate information to the institutions about the effectiveness of teaching and learning even the students achieve high results based on tests and exams.

Quality assurance of teaching staff

The faculty assessment remains unchanged since the Soviet Union times. The procedures are very formal and don’t assess faculty skills and development adequately although many universities developed specific criteria for faculty assessment but they are mainly used for compensation calculation.  Belarusian higher education system is not tenure based. The faculty elected to their position based on the fulfillment of formal requirements for max of 5 years and min of 1 year. The option of 3 years appointment also exists.  There is no criteria to assess the knowledge transfer, teaching methods innovativeness and research potential. What matters in assessing faculty is how thick the published textbook or teaching materials are.

Information systems

Universities informational system has improved through the years however it lacks some of the important elements such as effectiveness of teachers, employability of graduates and the institution’s own key performance indicator. 

The universities do not monitor their placements once the graduate became employed. 

Universities own key performance indicators do not exists as it is solely controlled and administered by the state. Thus the further development of quality education hampered by HEIs exclusion from this process and reconfirms the total state control over its development.

Effectiveness of teachers is not accessed separately to the required position appointment criteria at the time of appointment. There is no faculty assessment by students.

Public information

The information about the universities organizational structure, its leadership, programs offered and other associated activities are public.  What is not made public is universities finance. The information on learning outcomes is vague and not clearly defined as there is no clear understanding what it exactly means and how to do it. The employment destinations are not available for public so the potential applicants can’t review it in advance to make an appropriate choices and decisions.  The students’ evaluations of quality of education results are not accessible to students themselves and to public. The situation with public information shows how dependent institutions are and they are totally controlled and administered by the state.

The following measures should be sought after:

• To develop adequate legal framework to comply with European standards and guidelines for quality assurance
• To design universities own key performance indicators
• To prepare an action plan to improve the existing internal quality management system to meet European standards specifically in faculty assessment.
• To use international expertise and experience in implementing the required assessment criteria.

B. For external quality assurance arrangements, the description should focus on the way in which the competent authorities of your country comply with the European Standards and Guidelines (ESG) adopted by Ministers in 2005. To the extent that your country does not comply with the ESG, the description should include your plans for doing so and the timetable for achieving this. Elements that may be covered include cooperation with quality assurance agencies of other countries with a view to assessing the quality of your institutions as well as with organizations and networks such as ENQA.

In accordance with the law, the Ministry of Education is the only state body that has a right to issue educational licenses and accredit any HEIs. The rules of procedures, requirements and guidelines for the institutions’ self-assessments and those seeking accreditation and licensing are developed by the National Institute for Higher Education, Quality Assurance Department of the Ministry of Education and approved by the Ministry of Education. The detailed criteria and requirements for accreditation are not public. There is no independent quality assurance agency in Belarus as well as the country doesn’t use any of the existing European agencies for its HE quality assurance. The Ministry assigned the controlling, planning and assessing role to its Quality Assurance Department that is responsible for proceeding with Institutions’ quality assurance. The accreditation criteria can randomly be aligned with ENQA. Quality management system evaluation results are only partially related to the teaching and learning qualities. The ISO 9001 introduction and use replaced the existing complex HEI assessment once in 5 years by one in 3 years and annual partial assessment based on the increasing number of quality management system criteria, which are not adopted to the educational environment.

Belarus is officially a member of a number of international quality assurance organizations: European Organization for Quality, International Organization for Standardization and CIS Inter-Governmental Council for Standardization, metrology and certification. The country is not a member of the European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education until it joins the Bologna.  The joining EAQA will require the evaluation of existing in Belarusian higher education quality assurance standards, requirements and procedures to incorporate international practice without undermining the national higher education system.

Presented above details confirm the limited application of European standards for internal and external quality assurance.  Belarusian higher education quality assurance system remains inefficient. It complies with the European standards partially but lacks a number of important elements such as students’ involvement, feedback from students and staff, faculty development policies and public access to the information.  We propose the following measures to improve the current state of affairs:

• To develop adequate legal framework to comply with European standards and guidelines for quality assurance.
• To use international expertise in introducing the external quality assurance requirements in compliance with European standards
• To seek international accreditation for HEIs and the teaching and learning quality assurance by independent agency.

3. Recognition of Qualifications

A. The fair recognition of foreign qualifications is a prerequisite for academic mobility and the fundamental principle of the Council of Europe/UNESCO Lisbon Recognition Convention. If your country has not yet ratified the convention, please indicate your plans and timetable for doing so. Regardless of whether your country has ratified the convention or not, please outline your actions, plans and priorities in regards to the recognition of foreign qualifications in your country, with an indication of a timetable. It is suggested the description comprise the organization and competence of the national competent authorities for recognition and the role of ENICs/NARICs. Arrangements and policies for the recognition of qualifications earned through alternative learning paths/lifelong learning should also be addressed.

Belarusian Higher Education qualifications framework has undergone some transformation during the last decade especially with expressed desire to join Bologna. The new Educational Code (Code) defines it in terms of degrees, diploma and certificate received but provides only general norms for qualification recognition (Article 102 and 122). The qualification recognition process is regulated by the secondary legal acts:

1. Rules of procedures on professional qualification recognition  (#981) approved by the Council of Ministers on July 21, 2011.
2. Rules of procedures on academic qualification recognition (#560) approved by the President (decree from November 17, 2004).
3. Higher Attestation Commission of the Belarus decision (#131) on academic degree nostrification from December 30, 2003.
4. Guidelines on foreign academic qualification re-attestation (#12) approved by the Higher Attestation Commission of the Belarus.
5. Agreement on qualification recognition between Government of Belarus and Government of Russian Federation from February 27, 1996.
6. Agreement on rules of procedures for qualification recognition between Russian Higher Attestation Committee of the Ministry of Education and Belarusian National Higher Attestation Commission from September 29, 1999.
7. Agreement on qualification recognition between Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan from November 24, 1998 (edition from February 26, 2002).
8. Agreement on qualification recognition between Belarus and Turkmenistan from January 25, 2010.
   

The rules of procedures are approved by the Council of Ministers if not otherwise set by the President of Belarus. In other words, the process is regulated by the President and applications are reviewed on case-by-case basis. The qualification recognition, duration of study verification and certificates acceptance are conducted in accordance with Belarusian law.

The state established ENIC-NARIC information office assigning its role to Foreign Credentials Assessment Department (Belarusian ENIC). However, its role in the qualification recognition process is invisible. The actual recognition processes are handled by National Institution of Higher Education. The Ministry of Education issues the official recognition certificates based on the institute’s application evaluation results. This means that Belarusian ENIC role is no defined and its presence in such format proves to be ineffective.

The qualification recognition procedures are in place but the actual process doesn’t meet  the European standards. The Lisbon convention was ratified 2008 with enforcing the needed administrative procedures and nominating the responsible agency (Department on Qualification Recognition at the National Institute for Higher Education [further Department]). The existing procedure includes: individual’s application to the respective authority handling the qualification recognition matters consisting of required documents to proceed with the application. The application is reviewed and verified in accordance with the Department’s rules and procedures. When the process is completed the Department sends its conclusion to the Ministry, which issues the official recognition certificate. The Ministry of Education is the only body that issues the official qualification confirmation.

In spite of the existing qualification recognition procedures, what we have is that  qualifications received outside of Belarus is recognized based on bilateral agreements between Belarus and other foreign countries.  Such approach makes the process more complicated and individuals studied in countries with which Belarus doesn’t have a bilateral agreement on qualification recognition face the situation when their qualification may not be recognized. 

The other important aspect where Belarus failed is the adjustment of programs structure and curriculum to European standards. The Bachelor degree (BA) doesn’t have an equivalent in Belarusian higher education system in spite of the fact that new code provides the general framework for 2-cycle format. The existing requirements for qualification do not have an analogue for this type of degree as well as the labor market is not ready to accept the graduates with such degree. The European labor market is also not quite ready for such change however the 2 cycle system has been in place there for number of years thus the acceptance of BA as a common rule is on-going process. In addition to BA recognition, we are facing the problem of Master degree (MA) recognition. The actual MA degree was diminished when it was turned to the 1^st year of Ph.D. study. The new code provides the definition for MA degree formally but it is still unclear how it will affect and be reflected within the current higher education structure. However, the current intention to decrease the specialist duration of study for 25% will affect the entire degrees structures. It is unclear to what extent and whether the structure will only include BA and MA and how it will change the qualification recognition process. From our point of view, such move can affect the current higher education structure in a number of ways. First, the existing legal framework will require readjustment. Second, the programs’ structure will have to be revised and adjusted to actual BA and MA level as set in the new code. Third, the curriculum will need to be totally re-hauled. Fourth, the specialist degree will lose its meaning and will have to be eliminated in order to have functional system in accordance with Bologna principles. On the other hand, this cut could simply constitute the further decrees of higher education budget and has nothing to do with reforms.

Current programs and courses structures are not comparable with foreign programs’ ones. The difference comes in subjects and courses taught and number of hours assigned for them. They don’t correspond to Belarusian programs structure. This means that the individuals’ qualifications can’t be recognized in Belarus in current context. In fact, exchange students are obliged to pass all exams on those subjects that were not taught at the host university during that term upon their return to home country. The time frame for this is very limited and a number of disciplines to catch up on may reach 10 in some cases. This is students’ individual work and unless they pass they are not able to continue their study next term. The recognition process itself also doesn’t correspond to European Convention on qualification recognition principles as majority of foreign degrees received outside of CIS countries are not recognized in Belarus due to fundamental differences in program structure and curriculum.

The other milestone is academic (Ph.D. and doctoral) qualification recognition received outside of the country. It is impossible to confirm it in Belarus due to the rules of procedures shortcomings as well as existing politicizing and administrative control of post-graduate and doctoral studies.  The Higher Attestation Committee controls academic qualification recognition process and not the Ministry of Education. This situation is common for many CIS countries and Belarus is not an exception. However, there is no other country except Belarus where the Ph.D. or Doctoral dissertations defenses are considered illegal if they were not approved by the Higher Attestation Committee. This is clearly breaching European Convention on qualification recognition principles. Unfortunately, there are no visible steps made to improve the situation. The government considers academic qualification in all forms as a strategic asset and continues to control all activities in this area.

We suggest that the following measures should be taking to resolve the current situation:

• To begin the complex higher education program and curriculum reform
• To develop the comprehensive legal framework for qualifications recognition
• To involve international experts to the process to meet the EHEA requirements for higher education qualifications recognition.

B. The Diploma Supplement and the European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) are important transparency instruments for improving recognition and Ministers have committed to implementing both; in the case of the Diploma Supplement to deliver it automatically, free of charge and in a widely spoken language. Please describe the current state of implementation of these instruments in your country as well as your plans, priorities and timetable for further developments.

The qualification recognition shortcomings described above lead to the on-going discussion regarding introduction of European format Diploma Supplement (DS) and moving towards ECTS system. This seems that these tasks are still in transition and have been there for a long time. In according to the official statement, 2010/2011 graduates were to receive the DS of a new format, which didn’t seem to occur. The new deadline for European format DS is 2011/2012 graduates.  Such delay reasoned by the difficulties in terminology translating. The simple question arises: why Belarus doesn’t use the neighboring countries expertise in this. For instance Russia, who joined Bologna long time ago and number of Universities adopted new format of DS. The educational systems are similar as well as subjects taught thus it would speed up and easy the implementation process. Similar approach could apply to ECTS introduction. However, the problem lies in different interpretation and misunderstanding of what ECTS is. The Ministry presents is a credit – modular system that is calculated based on the subjects taught and student’s study rating. This approach breached the ECTS principles as such.   This also underlines that the system can’t be changed by administrative orders that exist in higher education now. The universities must be involved into the process which is not the case in Belarus.

We suggest that the following measures should be taking to defuse the situation:

• To reform higher education programs and revise its curriculum.
• To increase the universities awareness and involvement into the process through establishing the informational offices in multiple locations.
• To involve the international Russia inclusive experts for ECTS implementation and speeding up new format of DS introduction.
• To evaluate the current programs’ structure and provide the recommendation what should be done to implement ECTS and how. This will definitely require external expertise.

 

III. OTHER KEY AREAS

1. Academic mobility

The new educational code identifies the international mobility as activities directed to students and faculty exchange, research projects and educational services in country for foreign citizens. The universities international cooperation activities including academic mobility are regulated by the international agreements, to which Belarus is signatory, HEIs international programs offered by the organizations to which country is a member and by a few other countries that have official representation in Belarus.  The Ministry of Education must approve participation in all international cooperation programs including academic mobility. The educational code provides the legal framework for it but mostly it is regulated by secondary legal acts approved either by the Ministry of Education or the Council of Ministers.

International academic mobility participation is very low due to being administratively regulated by the Ministry although the legal framework allows HEIs to follow their own international cooperation goals. All activities are controlled by and reported to the Ministry. Academic mobility has become a part of general HE development based on the objectives of new National Program for Higher Education Development for 2011-2015. Currently, the following exchange program officially available for students and faculty: Erasmus Mundus, DAAD (up until now it provided support mostly for Ph.D. students), Fulbright program, Universities’ exchange programs within their own international cooperation agreements if exists (exchange program with China run by the Belarusian State University in the past), Swiss internships and scholarships for engineering and IT.

In addition, there are a number of other scholarships programs for exchange and internships but the third party – diplomatic missions and international organizations present in Belarus, normally administers them.  The Council of Ministers decision #1617 on “Issues related to studying at foreign HEIs” approved the Rules of Procedures regulating the state funding for academic mobility on November 30, 2011. The rules of procedures define the selection criteria and requirements for the applicants, funding structure.   The rules of procedures also determine the duration of study – up to one year, which may not constitute the completion of the chosen courses as well as a number of place for which funding is available. As it currently stands, the number of place determined by the Ministry of Education is at around 50. 

Students’ mobility

Students’ mobility  remains low. The participation level in Erasmus Mundus program is at about 65 persons during its 4 years presence in Belarus. The Ministry of Education data says that 250 students participate in exchange programs during 2009-2011 against government claims that annual mobility turnover is 3,000 (including CIS countries). The official sources sates that 141,000 students participated in different exchange programs in 1996-2004 rising to 161,000 by 2007. These figures do not have any basis. Based on our own review of the situation, we can state that between 2,000 and 3,000 students went through different mobility programs during 1996-2007. Those programs were not funded by the state.

At present, three different mobility types exist in Belarus.

1. Official exchange programs. They are recognized and accepted by the state
   
2. Informal mobility when students leave for studying abroad at their own expenses (parents cover the costs). These students are also enrolled to vocational study programs at Belarusian HEIs in many cases. This enables them to receive Belarusian degree (diploma) to avoid going through the qualification recognition process regularly resulting in Ministry’s rejection to confirm foreign degree. 
3. Alternative mobility. These are the programs launched by different countries and specifically designed for Belarusian students (Polish Kalinovsky program, EHU scholarships, ect.)

Starting from 2012, Belarusian government plans to support up to 50 students through the state funded mobility program in accordance with new Council of Ministers decision (#1617) from November 30, 2011. It doesn’t seem to be enough to increase mobility participation. For example, in 2010/2011 academic year 146 students went to study through Kalinovsky program alone. This number is 3 times more than what Belarusian government is ready to support in attempt to boost mobility and meet Bologna requirement for raising mobility participation to 20% mobile graduates in EHEA.

Faculty mobility

This remains a grey area within the academic mobility because there is no public information on it.  On the other hand, we can confirm that faculty mobility exist as their own private undertakings. The universities do not have financial means to support such mobility as well as there is a very few programs supporting this (DAAD and Fulbright programs). The new National Program for HE development stresses the importance of international component through the exchange and attracting international faculty to teach at English language programs.  There is a very few English language programs.  Among them are MBA program at Belarusian State University funded by USAID and Telecommunication Networks and Information Security in Telecommunication at Belarusian State University of Informatics and Radio Electronics. Although for international students it is considered a low cost programs- $4,250 as of July 2011 (2011/2012 academic year) - to compare to similar ones in Europe and North America. However, the low tuition fee doesn’t seem to be main reason why foreign students are not keen to study in Belarus. The state considers the increase in number of foreign students at Belarusian universities as additional cash for struggling economy but not for the benefit of strained higher education finance. The lack of visiting faculty at those programs is also great concern among academic community. Current law doesn’t provide any legal framework for hiring foreign faculty except Russian nationals as well as rules, procedures and guidance to do so.

We want to underline that unless administrative control and further politicizing of higher education including mobility participant selection process sees to exist there will be no progress made in this area.

We strongly believe that the following actions must be in place to boost the academic mobility:

1. Launching alternative mobility scheme that will envisage the countries based scholarship support for Belarusian students who are repressed at their home university for social active position and their political aspiration that don’t fall into the state promoted policies. We do not exclude that this might turn into somewhat continuous study on the full-time bases.
2. Opening dual degree programs that will include mobility component for students, faculty and staff.
3. Developing legal framework adhering to best European practices in the field of higher education.
4. Establishing transparent selection process without state control and run with the participation of independent evaluators.
5. Starting the complex higher education system reform to incorporate the European standards for degree division, programs and curriculum structures.

2. The Social Dimension of Higher Education

Work to strengthen the social dimension of higher education aims at realizing the aspiration expressed by the EHEA Ministers at their 2007 meeting that “the student body entering, participating in and completing higher education at all levels should reflect the diversity of our populations”. Please describe the social support mechanisms for students in your country.

Please provide a description of the main achievements in strengthening the social dimension of higher education in your country as well as of the main challenges in strengthening it further, including your priorities, plans and timetable in this respect.

It is suggested the description comprises an outline of the social composition of the student body in your country, including an overview of possible under-represented groups and whether your country has any national targets for access and completion in higher education of students from under-represented groups. In this context, it may be relevant to describe whether there are systematic differences between study programs and/or institutions (e.g. in terms of the profile of study programs or the geographical location of the institutions within the country) and whether there are national or institutional strategies in place for making the student body reflect the diversity of your national population. A description of current data collection in this area as well as plans and timetable for further improving such data collection would also be welcomed.

Belarus has made significant progress and achieved a lot in providing social security for disadvantaged social groups. Constitution of the Republic of Belarus and new Education Code ensure equal opportunities and access to education to all individuals without any discrimination on sex, race and nationality grounds. The following social groups had advantages in access to HEIs till 2011: applicants from rural areas, people with disabilities, orphans, winners of national contests in specific subject areas, children from low income families, individuals suffered after Chernobyl catastrophe, etc.  Access to higher education for disadvantaged social groups is stimulated by different measures: specific admissions rules and requirements, students’ stimulation mechanisms (stipends, min social standards in education, reduced transportation fare) specific social packages for young specialists upon completion of their study, etc. However, government doesn’t go beyond what it is already in place and doesn’t apply other available mechanisms to allow access to higher education for broader social groups. For example, the educational services differentiation and modernization in accordance with the social groups need could be one of them.

Geographically, higher education is uneven. Most of the HEIs are located at the capital – Minsk with 22 public HEIs and 9 private. The Higher Education Institutions distribution by regions is as follows: Brest - 4; Vitebsk - 5; Gomel - 7; Grodno - 3; Mogilev - 5.

In 2010 53% of students population were studying in Minsk. High HEIs concentration in Minsk put youth migration at a rise and creates certain problems in settling them in another location. 65% of students in Minsk HEIs are not provided with dormitory accommodation. Those who are renting accommodation receive compensation of  at about 10 euro (105,000 BLR) which is 10 times less than real rental cost.

The study in Belarusian language remains problematic and unresolved. Based on the census results 53,2% of the populations indicated Belarusian as their native language while 41,5% referred to Russian as native. In reality, 23,4% of population uses Belarusian on a daily basis and 70,2% uses Russian. Belarusian and Russian languages are both official state languages in accordance with the law. In reality, higher education system doesn’t have an educational program fully taught in Belarusian thus making it impossible to receive higher education in Belarusian language for some social groups. Civil activists have been demanding to open at least one HEI offering educational programs in Belarusian but the authorities have ignored this. The references to national and cultural values of educational policies are not acknowledged in new education code.

Another socially disadvantaged group experiencing problem with access to higher education is people with disabilities. Based on the information obtained from organization “Office for people with disabilities rights” people with disabilities are facing numerous problems. The main problems among others are that HEIs are not equipped for them and don’t have programs designed specifically for them. Statistics speaks for itself: 6% of people in wheelchairs received higher education, 10,7% - people with vision disabilities and 6,3% - with hearing disabilities. E- learning programs are accessible for this category but only on tuition fee basis against other forms of study. Mentally disabled people, people with nerves system disabilities and anomaly disabilities are the most vulnerable group. There is a vivid example of disabled people discrimination in access to higher education. Female with vision disability since childhood was refused admission to the Belarusian State University at the documents submission stage. The University’s administration reasoned their decision that they are not equipped for such people. However, this individual went to claim that she has the same rights to higher education as any other young person and was granted the possibility to pass entrance exams. Her results were outstanding and she was admitted to Law Faculty. However, this is one among few positive outcomes in similar situations.  In fact, none of Belarusian universities is equipped to accommodate disabled people for studying there.

There is also very narrow niche in access to education for elderly and disabled group of people due to the fact that life learning approached was viewed as professional skills development for employed part of population leaving these groups outside.

Informal education is not considered as a higher education degree. It has not been legalized in new education code and not viewed as a part of HEIs educational services.

 

IV. VALUES AND FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES

1. Academic freedom and institutional autonomy

Please describe the fundamental values underlying your higher education system andprovision. It is suggested that the description includes an outline of the legal provisions concerning academic freedom and institutional autonomy as well as a description of how these fundamental values are ensured in practice. It is further suggested that reference be made to provisions of the Magna Charta Universitatum5 in this respect.

Institutional autonomy

The Belarusian higher education went through different stage of transformation to incorporate international educational standards during 1993-2004. In 2011 the new Educational Code came in force and once again reconfirmed the state ownership of classical universities and majority of higher education institutions.

The code assigns main decision-making role to the governmental bodies such as the Ministry of Education, the Council of Ministers and the President. The Universities Rectors Council was established in the past and is supposed to play the role of initiator of educational reform, advisory and monitoring role but the legal framework regulating their activities are not developed and their role is minimized in the process of reform. The Belarusian HEIs organizational structure represents bureaucratic centralized management system.

The University’s Rector, key position within the HEI, is approved  and appointed by the Ministry and the President. The rector is not accounted to any internal governing body, public  and academic community. The private HEIs fall into the same category as state in decision on Rector’s appointment.  None of Belarusian HEIs signed Magna Charta Universitatum.

The new rules of procedures regulating HEI Council establishment  are approved by the Ministry of Education on July 18, 2011 do not assign them with decision-making powers on the issues determining HEI autonomy. The Council doesn’t have the right to elect and dismiss Rector, Vice-Rectors, Deans, approve and amend HEI Statute, approve new educational programs and study plans, to approve establishing of new and liquidation of old departments and research labs, to approve financial reports and doesn’t have a right to final expertise and award academic ranks and qualifications.

The new Educational Code and the system in general doesn’t promote fundamental values of European society: institutional autonomy and academic freedom. This continues to follow the traditional HEIs management style dated back to the USSR times using administratively regulated HE development and state control over its functioning.

Academic Freedom

The Bologna documents state that any European higher education reforms should be based on institutional autonomy and academic freedom principles. Countries that want to join in shall respect these values on which HEIs accountability to society is built.  The society, from its side, should take interest in HEIs policies development and application in respect to key values of academic freedom: freedom of thought, freedom of opinion, freedom of speech, freedom of movement, freedom of teaching, rights for association, etc. These rights are guaranteed by the Constitutions in many countries and are viewed that HEIs act in public interests. Belarusian law doesn’t guarantee any of these to HEIs faculty, staff and students. The law doesn’t protect their rights and doesn’t guarantee freedom of speech and opinion. The new Education Code didn’t include any of the academic freedom values at all. Since 2008, the advocacy organization monitoring ‘ban on profession’ issues noted that most socially active faculty and researchers have been ousted from the universities on political, religious and ideological grounds. Social sciences and humanities faculty were the first to experience such ‘ban’ as their academic profession became a subject to ideological intervention from the state. Now this practice is extended to the other academic professions. HEIs faculty must form patriotism and national self-awareness in students based on the state ideological policy in accordance with Article 18 of the Education Code. This affects all faculty irrespectively of their academic profession.

The HEIs and faculty duties and responsibilities to each other are set in the employment contracts and its addendums/amendments, which are regular in a conflict with academic freedom principles. Faculty choices of publishers are limited to the journals’ selection approved by HEIs and if published somewhere else the faculty may be punished. In addition to this, the universities own publications and announcements to made public and other announcements are subject to censorship by administration.

Faculty academic freedom in choice of teaching methodology is limited by the educational study program standards. Article 217 of the code defines that study program of particular discipline is legally binding and sets discipline’s aims and objectives, its content, number of hours taught per subject, recommends teaching methods, literature to be used and other educational means. All programs are approved by the Ministry of Education and are meant for use at any university. Faculty must follow Ministry’s teaching guidelines.

Faculty freedom of movement is not just limited by HEIs financial resources but in many cases by lengthy and frequently politically motivated bureaucratic procedures and administrative barriers. This relates to any travel undertaken by faculty. It mostly hit the faculty teaching at EHU located in Lithuania. They were asked to stop their cooperation with the university or be fired from home HEI.  Most of the faculty chose to continue teaching at EHU but in secret in spite of looming punishment.

In regards to students’ travel, they have to obtain permission to leave from the Minister in accordance with its guidelines #125 from December 27, 2005. Normally, any travel request or permission to leave requires lengthy bureaucratic approval procedure and regularly rejections or unexplained delays are politically motivated. Students have been taking risk to leave without any permission to participate in different events of their choice. For example, Ms. Tatian Shaputko was expelled from her university for participating in Eastern Partnership Civil Forum in November 2009 in spite of her outstanding academic results.

Article 52 of the Education Code allows faculty to form professional associations and other civil organizations if their activities do not breach the law. In reality, pro-government organizations are allowed to pursue their activities in HEIs while alternative ones are facing numerous barriers at registration stage and the members of non-registered NGOs may face criminal charges filed against them in accordance with Article 193.1 of Criminal Code. On the other hand, HEIs leadership forces faculty and staff to join pro-government organizations such as NPA Belarya Rus by what violate their rights for association.

In general, new Educational Code and the current HE system don’t promote fundamental values of Bologna: institutional autonomy and academic freedom. Belarus continues to follow the traditional HEIs management style dated back to the USSR times using administratively regulated HE development. .

Based on this, we can state that Belarusian Higher Education system doesn’t respect fundamental principles of Bologna and EHEA and this needs to be given primarily attention and concern. Unless Belarus adheres to these principles, the higher education development in country and its position in European educational environment remain questionable.

The measures to be taken to resolve this standstill must include:

• legal framework reform
• higher education administrative control elimination
• use of foreign expertise in higher education development.

2. Public responsibility for higher education

EHEA Ministers have twice - in 2001 and 2003 - stated that higher education is a public good and a public responsibility. Please describe how the public responsibility for higher education is organized and put in practice in your national higher education system. It is suggested that the description comprises a consideration of the role and responsibilities of various actors as well as a consideration of the main challenges in this area and your plans, priorities and timetable for meeting these challenges.                                                                                

Contradictory Magna Charter, excessive dependence on political trends and high bureaucracy of higher education management leads to HEIs constant decrease of their accountability to the society.

The Board of Trustees and/or similar governing bodies is the mechanism to represent public interests in higher education. The Education Code allows the Board of Trustees presence in HEIs but the newly adopted rules of procedures regulating the Board of Trustees establishment and approved by the Ministry of Education doesn’t assign any decision making power to them. The Board doesn’t have any influence on HEI development strategy as well as doesn’t have any power and rights in presenting and defending the rationale related to the labor market needs.  The Board of Trustees has a consultative and advisory role and their main task is to search for additional financial sources for HEIs needs in accordance with the rules of procedures.  The Ministry of Education and HEIs leaderships are convinced that students must pay for their education having in mind that it is an investment in human capital i.e. higher education but at the same time, they don’t allow employers and society to participate in higher education decision-making process.

The government understanding what quality of education is doesn’t relate to the need of educating a high quality specialists but rather their compatibility to educational standards developed and approved by the Ministry of Education without any input from and participation of society and businesses.

3. Cooperation among stakeholders and student participation

Within the EHEA, higher education policies are developed in partnership between public authorities, the higher education community and other stakeholders. Please provide a description of who you see as the main stakeholders in higher education in your country, how these stakeholders are involved in developing higher education at present and what you see as the main challenges in this area, including your plans, priorities and timetable for addressing the challenges. In view of the fundamental role of student participation, the description should be explicit on the role of students in higher education governance at both institutional and system level, including whether student representatives are elected by the student body and whether there is an independent, democratic and representative national student union open to all students.

Belarusian higher education is funded by multiple sources where the state contribution is constantly decreasing. It seems that it is a high time for HEIs seek cooperation with different societal players: government, businesses, civil society as well as develop strong partners network. On the other hand, it is difficult to establish effective partnerships with state being one of the main stakeholders and exercises its power.  The result of state dominant position is the approval of new Education Code. The Code doesn’t provide the framework for building social partnerships and defines the relationships between HEIs and employers in terms of ‘Client’ and ‘Executor’ relations where ‘client’ as well as the other stakeholders, excluding government, don’t participate in HEIs management and decision-making. The are considered as sponsors or donors without any influence on HEIs development strategy. There is no legal basis for establishing independent Board of Trustees and Endowment Funds.

Students and their parents don’t have any influence whatsoever either while they are the once who are main sponsors of HEIs. Formally, parents could be among Board of Trustees Members but the Board itself doesn’t have any decision-making role and powerful influence on HEIs mission and strategy, teaching methodology and program content, HEIs financing in comparison to European traditional HEIs structure and governance.  The number of parents represented on Board is not regulated.

The new rules of procedures for HEIs Advisory Board (Senate) establishment guarantees 25% of places to be reserved for students representatives but the Board doesn’t have any power thus making such representation ineffective. Students representation remains controversial in current situation as they are normally represented by the BNYU, students union and students’ council representatives that doesn’t guarantee students representation across the board. Besides, there is no guarantee that Board Members election will be conducted in accordance with democratic principles of transparency and fairness due to the complete political control by the HEIs leadership and government.

There is no visible students participation in HEIs self-governance. Current legislation doesn’t have any clause on students’ participation, rights and responsibilities. It only describes the disciplinary measures to be taken against students in violation of HEI’s norms and rules. The only recognition of students’ rights comes within HEIs internal rules and procedures allowing students to challenge the faculty decision during the study period. There are a few cases when this was exercised in past.   Students’ organizations rights are limited and their activities and management are controlled and regulated by HEIs ideology departments to monitor the adherence to state ideological policies. The most vivid example of students’ organizations control is that the only organization representing students is National Students Association, which is a part of Belarusian National Youth Union, pro-government youth organization. Starting from 2001, authorities have been closing independent youth organization whose mission and activities were different from the official line. This is symbolic that ESU, representing Belarus in European Students Association was closed in 2001 by court order. Fortunately, this organization is still active but continues its work underground. Members of non-registered independent organizations may face criminal charges for participating in such establishments in accordance with Article 193.1 of Criminal Code. EU recognizes such actions as a violation of rights for Association and views its full discharge as one of many conditions based on which the dialogue with Belarusian government can be resumed.

To conclude, the following actions must be taken:

• the legal framework on students’ participation in decision-making within the                university should be developed;
• HEIs should have clear strategy on their involvement.
• develop strategy of stakeholders participation in higher education development;
• develop regulatory base for their participation;
• develop legal framework for active students’ participation.

 

CONCLUSION

The evaluation of Belarusian higher education policies, existing legal framework, institutional autonomy and academic freedom conditions allows us to conclude that without complex higher education reforms Belarus full membership in EHEA won’t be effective. We strongly believe that Belarus entrance to EHEA should be done in stages based on proposed ‘Road map for reforms” (see attached).