Reforming Higher Education in the Nordic Countries

Citation

Bowden, J.A. (2005), "Reforming Higher Education in the Nordic Countries", Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 353-355. https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880510626610

This study of change in the higher education systems of the Nordic countries of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden provides a rich example of the mix of influences on university systems and the part those influences play in the change process that has engulfed all higher education systems in recent decades. The editors' opening chapter sets the scene by making both an historical and thematic review of the shift from elite, autonomous institutions to the institutions we know today, catering for more students than could have been imagined a few decades ago and being accountable to a wide range of agencies. Fägerlind and Strömqvist discuss the influences on the Nordic institutions of:

• •

  the world‐wide expansion and diversification of higher education;

• •

  the importance of higher education to government through its contribution to the national economy;

• •

  the changing models of operation with the market now playing a key role;

• •

  the growing emphasis on international exchange and the need for higher education systems in different regions to be compatible;

• •

  formal supranational agreements that directly affect the conduct of higher education institutions, most notably by the European Union but also, to a lesser extent, by the Nordic Council;

• •

  the increasing expectation for higher education institutions to be accountable publicly both for the efficient use of public funds and for the quality of outcomes;

• •

  the introduction of evaluation agencies and performance‐based funding (referred to by Rinne in the chapter on Finland as managerialism) as two specific aspects of the accountability expectation.

The Nordic universities provide an example of all of those influences at work. In global terms, all of the Nordic higher education systems began with low participation rates and those rates have increased substantially in recent decades. As Kim points out in the chapter on Sweden, this growth has not been uniform, with Sweden lagging behind other Nordic countries and with still further expansion necessary to match participation rates elsewhere.

Some of those differences among Nordic countries can be traced to local cultural norms. Rasmussen describes higher education in Denmark as moving from an elite university sector and a separate system of professional schools to a more complex and highly overlapping higher education system that now includes a parallel strand providing continuing adult education. Kim represents the Swedish higher education system as being one of the first, along with the United Kingdom and Australia, to create a unified national system in the 1970s. As expansion in the 1990s occurred, Kim argues that the diversity among the institutions themselves has increased dramatically despite being managed by a uniform framework. Kim cites the several changes of government in Sweden in the 1990s as contributing to the ongoing conflict between uniformity and diversity in some aspects of recent policy. Jonasson sees a familiar conflict in Iceland's higher education system of the forces of convergence, homogenization and academic drift with the forces demanding relevance, accountability and standards. The new law on university education is too recent (1997) for its effects to be comprehensively evaluated. Rinne describes the Finnish higher education system as a “very massive binary system” of universities and polytechnics. The governance and management of higher education institutions is still the subject of parliamentary debate in Norway, with Kvil suggesting that there is a political intent in favour of more autonomy for such institutions.

All of the Nordic countries have been affected by the processes of the European Union (EU) even though Norway and Iceland are not members of EU. The focus of EU has been on removing barriers to interaction and exchange between European countries. While there are many statements that this is not a quest for uniformity, many Nordic academics would not see it that way. In particular, the structure of the degree pathways has been targeted (for “harmonisation”) and some Nordic universities (in Norway and Denmark, for example) that have had an initial five to six year program leading to a candidatus (Masters level) degree re‐structured around a basic three year undergraduate degree plus a two year Masters level degree. The European agreements generally go by a name referring to the location of the discussion and Fägerlind and Strömqvist give a range of information about these agreements. The Sorbonne declaration in 1998 was about this very issue of harmonisation. Fägerlind and Strömqvist point out that the Bologna declaration in 1999 was a more detailed one on the same issue, with the focus on knowledge as crucial for social and human growth rather than economic growth.

In the final chapter, Fägerlind and Strömqvist describe the many changes that have occurred among the higher education systems of the Nordic countries in response to the external influences described throughout the book. They address a question posed in the first chapter “are higher education systems in the Nordic countries today more or less similar as compared to decades ago?” They conclude that the entire region is “becoming increasingly tied to the global post‐industrial society both culturally and economically”. The role and functions of the universities reflect this trend. Europe is seen as a significant influence on the various responses individual Nordic countries have made. While they are all still quite different from each other (notably Finland, for instance, compared with the others), it is argued that all Nordic systems are uniformly less national and more European than they were a decade ago.

Most readers interested in higher education should find value in this book, irrespective of where they live and work, not just those interested in Nordic higher education. All universities in the world are subject to many of the same influences as have been experienced by the Nordic universities over recent decades. It is valuable to explore the common, international influences like massification, globalisation, accountability and managerialism, among others, in systems of higher education separate from our own and systems that are subject to a range of more local influences. In this way readers can identify the local, cultural and political aspects from the wider international influences and equip themselves to understand better their own systems of higher education.