Estonian higher education – a model for teaching the trends of Educational Policy

Kai Pata

PhD student of the Department of Education, University of Turku

2004

When facing the task to write an essay concerning the basics of educational policy,

one’s primary course of action would be turning to the resources of the university

libraries. To my surprise, as a reply to my information request for the educational

policy issues in Estonian libraries, a large variety (321) of information sources with a

very hectic nature were retrieved. Most of these were documents and articles from the

Estonian Educational Forums, the round table discussions held for defining about the

actual state and future steps of education in Estonia. There were also many reports of

specific cases how educational policy has been implemented in different countries.

But no books, which one could use as the basic source of information in learning

about the essence of educational policy, were available. The concept of educational

policy seemed to exist more as the community practice, which every author of

different issues was able to apply on its´ own way.

Many researchers (see Lave and Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998; Salomon and Perkins,

1998; Greeno, 1998) have assured that learning about community practices has to take

place in the course of practicing these activities. In this case, what would be the

options of learning about the educational policy without practicing it? In biology,

anthropology, and education the external observation of the community, and the

interpretation of the artefacts of that particular culture have proved to be the effective

methods for extracting new knowledge about the processes, and making

generalisations. Thus, it was considered by the author of this essay that the journals

concerning the scientific approaches about educational policy might be helpful in

defining the nature of educational policy, and some of its main trends for this essay.

Yet, if one obtains a good theoretical knowledge about all the issues related to the

educational policy in general level, the person might still not be able of applying this

knowledge. He or she needs to connect these general models with real situations in

hand. Therefore, this essay attempts to describe some definitions of educational

policy, and highlight its´ trends through the model case of Estonian higher education

policy.

Before the application of specific Estonian context, the factors, which all together

form the concept of educational policy, must be determined. In his research paper

Wielemans (2000) has proposed the following dynamic integrative model for the

educational policy (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. The educational policy process: an integrative model (Wielemans, 2000).

According to Wielemans (2000), the students are seen as the target of the policy. The

policy is been prepared by the central administration of the state, but also the regional

and local level administration are involved into making decisions about the policy and

into the execution processes. The schools are the local institutions, which implement

the policy. The student-centred focus must relate educational policy with the

pedagogic aims and the personal level accomplishments, and prevent it from being

outbalanced towards economic calculations, political-ideological pressures, and

administrative efficiency considerations. The implementation of the policy in the

educational institutions, and the evaluation processes, as part of it, weave themselves

around the educational goals and students´ achievements.

Wielemans’ (2002) model is based on the idea that educational policy is embedded in

the certain frames of the situation. It is assured that the changes in the situation have

triggered the changes in the development and implementation of educational policies

at different times and countries. Firstly, the political and ideological, culture of a

certain country, its´ facilities for professional work have influence on what people see

as the task of the education. Secondly, the demographic situation and the family

structures, the economic and technological state of the country have influence on its´

policy aims. Thirdly, besides nation-based situational background, the supra national

tendencies and institutions (e.g. IMF, UNESCO, OECD) and their program

documents can direct the national educational policies nowadays.

What concerns the policy-making actors in the certain situations, the Wielemans´s

(2002) educational policy model is bipolar. In one side there is state dictating the

policy, and on the other side there are the educational institutions streaming for

independent decision making. McDaniel (1996) introduces two paradigms in higher

education, which have guided the educational policies through centuries – the concept

of “academic freedom and institutional autonomy”, and the opposite tendency, the

“governmental influence”. He argues that higher education has its roots in the

consideration of the institutional autonomy and academic freedom. The papal bull

Parens Scientarium (1231) claimed the medieval universities´ autonomy from

external instances as a privilege. The regulation included the liberty of individual

faculties to determine their teaching methods and hours of their lectures. These first

universities have often been compared with the metaphor of the Ivory Tower because

there existed the desire to segregate the rare knowledge from lesser activities of

regular life. It was believed that the scarce resources shouldn’t be treated lightly,

hence the cloister like structure of the traditional university at these times (Salomon,

1999; Calvo-Sotelo, 2001).

The Medieval Age faced also the second tendency, the governmental and Christian

institutions demanding some influence in the university affairs, which often reached

beyond the institutional or religious reasons. The governmental influence started to

grow from century to century, together with the massive investment of public funds to

education, until the second paradigm state was reached in many countries, which can

be characterised by states´ legitimate interest in higher education systems. Yet the

recent tendencies in higher education have also shown the return to the

decentralization, and the governments respecting the vital areas of academic freedom

and institutional autonomy. As an example, in 1992 the Australian Federal Minister of

Employment, Education and Training (see McDaniel, 1996) has brought out that the

higher institutions should be free from government interference in deciding their

course content, methods of assessment, the research, the staff appointment, and the

expression of their views and opinions.

Wielemans (2000) distinguishes between three types of educational policy models:

the centralizing Jacobine state, the central state with the diversity of initiatives, and

the non-interventionist facilitating state. In the first model the states control over

educational institutions is done with the intention to guarantee ideological-religious

neutrality and the equality for all citizens to have equal educational opportunities. The

state controls the procedures, the curricula, the percentage of hours dedicated to

different disciplines in the curricula, the exams, and the qualification of the lecturers.

The policy is made from top to down and it is uniform. In the second model the state

keeps a strong central control over the institutions, with the right to decide the content

of the curricula and the lectures´ professional and salary matters. Nevertheless, this

model also accepts the establishment of the non-governmental higher institutions for

supporting the societal pluralism and the different ethical-religious convictions. Yet,

the official and politically subsidised education is distinct from unofficial free

educational activities. This model can be characterised by the term centralised, both

the downward, as well as, the upward decision making processes are taking place. The

facilitation model associates with the decentralised educational policy, only the basic

initiatives concerning the institution structures, the curricula, the recruitment of

teachers etc., are controlled. This model favours the diversity of higher educational

institutions, and the local initiatives on grassroots level.

The categorization of governance practices by Volkwein (1986) enabled to distinguish

the educational policy models on the discrete scale through the indicators of finance

and personnel policy. In the study about the comparison of European Canadian and

American higher order institutions, McDaniel (1996) has suggested that the issues of

course/content supply (authority on educational issues), institutional management, and

the student policy factors should be added to the former model. His new evaluation

tool enabled to assess the educational policy systems on the scale of centralised,

predominantly centralised, intermediate, predominantly decentralised, and

decentralised. The evaluation instrument (see MacDaniel, 1996, Appendix) contains

19 indicators in five main categories: finance, management, education, personnel

policy, and students. Depending of their characteristics the educational policy in

higher institutions could be scored from 19-95 points with this tool.

The idea of this essay is to show how Estonian higher education policy models have

changed at different situations. This essay does not pretend on the in-depth evaluation

of the Estonian higher education systems throughout the history. Yet, the different

educational policy models in higher education will be described, using the categories

and indicators suggested by McDaniel (1996), and Wielemans (2000).

I. Academia Gustaviana

The history of higher education in Estonia dates back to 1632 when the Academia

Gustaviana, the predecessor of the University of Tartu, was established by the

Swedish king’s Gustav II Adolf decree. The establishment of the university was part

of colonial policy in just-conquered Livonia. One year earlier the era of book printing

was opened up in Estonia as well, by opening the printing press of Academia

Gustaviana. The academy in Tartu (and Pärnu) functioned from 1632-1710 with

Philosophy, Law, Theology and Medical Faculties enjoying the privileges of the

University of Uppsala. The University of Uppsala, like other the medieval

universities, was established by papal bull. Pope Sixtus IV granted to the university of

Uppsala the corporate rights and established a number of provisions. Among the most

important of these was that the university was given officially the same privileges and

freedoms as the University of Bologna. This included the right to establish 4 faculties

(theology, canon and roman law, medicine and philosophy) and to award bachelor’s,

masters, licentiate, and doctoral degrees. The Archbishop of Uppsala was the

chancellor of the university with the duty to guarantee that these privileges and the

rights of the university would be preserved. The mentality and world outlook of the

Academia Gustaviana had a strong impact on Descartes’ philosophy. In 1689 the

Regulations of the Academia Gustaviana were enacted. The students of the university

were of Swedish, German, and Finnish origin. No Estonians were accepted.

The Figure 2 embeds the period of Academia Gustaviana into the educational policy

model. It can be argued that this period could be related to the Jacobine state model

(see Wielemans, 2002) in one hand, as the educational policy followed mainly the

regulations from upwards. Yet, as the university followed the similar freedoms and

privileges as the other medieval universities, the other tendency towards academic

freedom and institutional autonomy (see McDaniel, 1996), which can be related to

non-interventionist facilitating state, could be followed as well. Many historical

documents indicate that the students had in first order to follow the regulations of the

university, which differed from local regulations in town.

Figure 2. Educational policy model in the period of Academia Gustaviana.

II. Kaiserliche Universität zu Dorpat

In 1802 the political and educational interests of the Russian central government and

the Baltic-German elite coincided, and the university was reopened in Tartu as a

provincial Baltic university depending upon the local Knighthoods. The foundation

act confirmed by Alexander I, gave the university the legal status of the Russian State

University with German as a language of instruction. University had a dual nature in

that it belonged both into the set of German (was 11 largest German university at that

time in the world) and Russian universities. Financially and administratively, the

latter was more important; intellectually and regarding the professoriate, the former.

In teaching, the university educated the local Baltic-German leadership and

professional classes, as well as personnel especially for the administration and health

system of the entire Russian Empire. The first students' organisations began to appear

as corporations of fellow-country-men which were officially banned in the years

1824-1855, but in 1862 the corporate student body was legalised. According to the

Figure 3, the educational policy followed partly the state facilitating model (see

Wielemans, 2000), and the academic freedom with partial institutional autonomy (see

McDaniel, 1996).

Figure 3. Educational policy model in the period of Kaiserliche Universität zu Dorpat.

The freedom to be a half-German university ceased with the rise of nationalist

tendencies in Russia, which held homogenisation more important than retaining one

university on the international level within the Empire. In the wave of russification,

which started in 1889, Tartu University was converted into a traditional higher

educational establishment and the Russian language was introduced as the language

of instruction. The German professors and most of the students left the university and

continued their studies in Germany. The amount of Russian students was exceeding

all the others, but besides them also some Estonian and Latvian students were

accepted. The time also made possible the revival Estonian national tendencies. This

period could be clearly classified into the Jacobine state model (see Wielemans,

2000), and to the “governmental influence” stage (see McDaniel, 1996). Educational

policy – financing, regulations, choice of personnel, and the curricula content – was

directed by the Empire, and the university had few possibilities to interact in decision

making. Yet, the student organisations remained active, and in this area the political

changes found a gateway.

III. Tartu University of the Republic of Estonia

In the spring of 1918, the Russian university was closed down, and the voluntary

departure of the Russians opened up the path to a new university. In 1919 the

university opened its doors as Tartu University of the Republic of Estonia with

Estonian as a language of instruction. New subjects, laying the basis for the

development and research of national Estonian culture, were taught. The University

law was enacted in 1925. According to the law the university had the right to organise

scientific work and study issues, but the university was under supervision of the

ministry of Education. The study system was reorganised into the subject-based

studies. Several reorganisations were made in the area of faculty structures. The

rectors, prorectors, and deans were elected until 1938. The features of educational

policy in the first independent republic period could be characterised with the central

state model in one hand (see Wielemans, 2000), and with the academic freedom and

partial institutional autonomy (see McDaniel, 1996) on the other hand. The state

favoured the flourishing of national education that was necessary after 600 years of

oppression. Yet, the activity of very different educational institutions (catholic

schools, schools for Jews, the school of the community of old orthodox faith etc.) was

favoured in the Estonian Republic.

IV. Higher education during Soviet occupation

In the first Soviet academic year 1940/1941 the students' corporations and academic

societies were closed, scientific contacts with Western European centres of research

and universities were interrupted. The political cataclysms and repressions affected

the personnel of the university. The curricula of Tartu University were replaced by the

common syllabi of the Soviet Union: a 5-year course system was adopted, obligatory

political subjects based on the new marxist-leninist ideology, including the history of

the USSR, were introduced. After the war the university was subordinated to the

People's Education Commissariat of the Estonian SSR and from 1946 to the Ministry

of Higher Education of the Soviet Union. The higher education was financed by state

and it was free for the accepted students. Yet there were a limited number of

vacancies at certain disciplines, and the students and the lecturers had to be

ideologically suitable for the system. Six higher education institutions financed by

State existed at the period of 1940-1986 in Estonia. The severe communist oppression

lasted until the 1986. The educational policy in this period was very similar to the

russification period of higher education under the Russian Empire. This period could

be clearly classified into the Jacobine state model (see Wielemans, 2000), and to the

“governmental influence” stage (see McDaniel, 1996). Everything in education was

under control of the policy of Soviet Union and the university lacked all kinds of

autonomy and freedom in the financial, management, educational, personnel policy

and student initiative spheres.

In 1986 the private initiative form, the cooperative enterprise, was recognised by the

liberal Gorbatshev´s administration. A group of young intellectuals established in

Tallinn under the Association of Estonian Writers the private Estonian Institute of the

Humanities. The school distanced itself from the communist establishment and its´ re-

productive practices of official higher education system. It also attracted many

faculties from the West. The main value of Estonian Institute was opening the era of

private higher education in Estonia (see Tomusk, 2001). The second rebelling event in

the landscape of higher educational policy was the official republican level approval

of the Tartu State University Law, which was prepared by the Council of the

University of Tartu in 1989. The document was contradicting the existing practices

and normative regulations of the Soviet higher educational institutions.

The last period of soviet occupation reflected very interesting trends in educational

policy, which are not easy to describe in the frames of the educational policy models

of the Wielemans (2000). It can be characterised by the different policy models being

applied at a time. Tthe higher order institutions followed the Jacobine state model,

whereas the intermediate governmental organisations on the Estonian SSR level, and

at local level followed the non-interventionist facilitating model (see Figure 4). That

was supported by the universities´ and public systems´ turn towards academic

freedom and institutional autonomy. This conflict initiated the radical changes in

Estonian higher education, as well as, in the whole political system. This model

resembles the situation in the 18th century when the Kaiserliche Universität zu Dorpat

was established due to the variance of interests in the Russian Empire, and the

German speaking Baltic Knightshood (see Figure 3). The latter was strong enough to

influence the policy of German Empire against the Russia.

Figure 4. The educational policy in Estonian higher education system during the Gorbatshev period.

V. Re-establishment of higher educational systems in Estonian Republic

The re-establishment of the Estonian Republic started with the big boom of new

private universities. The universities started to change their study system from

previous 5-year course system towards 4-year bachelor courses. The degree of

MSc/MA comprised 2 additional years of study, and the degree of PhD 4 additional

years. The new system considered the previous 5-year diploma degrees as the master

level studies, yet without having the legal right to use the master degree definition.

The previous candidate of the doctor nomination was considered relevant with the

doctoral degree. Within 1992-1998 several legal acts were prepared for regulating the

higher education. The Law of Private School for regulating all private educational

institutions was accepted in 1993 and adopted in 1998. The University Law for

regulating 6 state universities, and the Law of the University of Tartu, addressing the

uniqueness of the only classical university, were enacted in 1995. Finally the Law of

Vocational Higher Education Institutions for regulating all the state-run universities

was enacted in 1998. Each of 6 governmental higher education organisations has its´

own law under the new legislation, and they enjoy the status of legal person, whereas

there are several other state controlled institutions, which do not. The public money is

now divided to the state universities according to the officially ordered students´

places. The students who are accepted can study free of charge. Besides this, the

universities are allowed to accept 20 % of students who must pay for their studies.

The official student loan system, run by banks, is supporting the self-financing of the

studies. For quality assurance there is the non-voluntary accreditation system of

curricula, research groups and units in public and private universities. The teaching

licences that are dependent of the accreditation results guarantee the quality of

education in private universities.

All these tendencies indicate that Estonian Republic is following the higher education

model, which favours partly the central state with the diversity of initiatives (the

strong financial support to the state universities, the central regulation and control

mechanisms in the quality of education, the licence system for private institutions),

and the non-interventionist facilitating state on the other hand (some state universities

as autonomous institutions with their own regulative documents, and right to earn

additional money by accepting students who must pay for studies). The universities,

on the other hand are streaming for bigger institutional autonomy and academic

freedom.

VI. Towards European higher education era

The new 21st century is facing more changes in the higher education system of

Estonia. When in earlier periods the educational policy was mainly influenced by the

factors from inside the state, nowadays the outside influence is gaining more and

more importance. In accordance of enacting the Bologna Declaration in 1999 (see

DeGroof, 1999) the education in Estonia is streaming towards the compatibility of

degrees, and the transferability of credits between universities within Estonia and

abroad. This has forced the universities to change the previous curricula towards new

3 + 2 years system. The last two years will give the student the master degree, which

is yet not relevant with the previous MSc or MA degree. The additional doctoral level

study lasts for 4 years as pervious. Many academic people inside the university see it

as the degradation of the master level education. Together with changing the curricula

into lego-type building blocks, the continuity inside the discipline subjects is believed

to be decreasing. This is seen as the threat towards academic, science directed

education. The second change, which Estonia is facing, is the gradual decrease of

state-played student places. It is questionable, how can Estonia fulfil the requirement

of the Universal Declaration of The Human Rights, which states that: Higher

education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit if many students

from low income families will be left out of the possibility of studying.

When stepping towards European higher educational era, the higher education policy

seems to be moving towards new educational policy models. These models can be

characterised by the diversity of interest at different levels of the actors who are

involved into policy-making. The universities are losing their academic independence

and initiative, and must follow the regulations of European normative acts. This

indicates towards the governance models of policy. On the other hand, the universities

are given more autonomy at the state level, and they are expected to be economically

more independent. The state’s role is seen in facilitating the education by regulative

acts, and evaluating the quality of teaching and science among other similar

institutions. Even though the author of this essay is supporting the ideas brought into

higher education by the Bologna Declaration, it is questionable, how can such new

situations in educational policy work effectively. The universities have been the

special institutions with privileges and academic freedom throughout centuries. Every

time when this autonomy and freedom has been suppressed or over-governed, the

result has been the lowered quality of education, and the universities´ rebelling

against this type of educational policy.

The idea of this essay was to describe the cases from Estonian higher education

history by applying some educational policy models. The state-focused educational

policy models by Wielemans (2000), and the university-focused educational policy

models by McDaniel (1996) were used. It was found that the descriptions of different

cases in Estonian higher education could not be characterised by these two types of

theories in a coherent and overlapping way. It was possible to use these two

approaches at a time by constructing the system with two axes – the state interest axis

and the university academic freedom/institutional authority axis (see Figure 5). The

model enabled to follow the fluctuations in Estonian higher education from very

liberate towards very controlled situations. It was noticeable that the extremely state-

centred educational policy in higher education was followed by the liberate models

due to the universities´ rebellion against totalitarian controlling. This figure does not

show which could the position of the 21st century higher education. It must be

considered, how to add the supra-state influences on this type of comparative models.

Figure 5. Estonian higher education models in the focus of state and university interests.

References

Calvo-Sotelo, P. C. (2001). The architecture of higher education. University spatial models at the start of the twenty first century. Higher Education Policy, 14, 183-196.

De Groof, J. (1999). On “the European Higher Education Area” after the Bologna Declaration of 19 June 1999. European Journal for Educational Law and Policy, 3, 77-79.

Greeno, J. G. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist, 53(1), 5-26.

History of the University of Tartu. [WWW document] http://www.ut.ee/ english/general/history.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York, Cambridge University Press.

McDaniel, O. C (1996). The paradigms of governance in higher education systems. Higher Education Policy, 9(2), 137-158.

Salomon, G. (1999). Higher education facing the challenges of the information age. European Journal for Education Law and Policy, 3, 41-47.

Tomusk, V. (2001). Higher education reform in Estonia: a legal perspective. Higher Education Policy, 14, 201-212.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, U.K.; New York, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.

Wielemans, W. (2000). European educational policy on shifting sand? European Journal for Educational Law and Policy, 4, 21-34.