This article was downloaded by: [University of Cambridge]On: 08 October 2014, At: 10:49Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Comparative EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cced20

Towards a European Education System?W. D. HallsPublished online: 02 Aug 2006.

To cite this article: W. D. Halls (1974) Towards a European Education System?, Comparative Education, 10:3, 211-219, DOI:10.1080/0305006740100306

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0305006740100306

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

COMPARATIVE EDUCATION Volume 10 No. 3 October 1974 211

Towards a European Education System?W. D. HALLS

Some years ago the 'convergence proposition' enjoyed a vogue among educational theorists:it was argued that cultural and technological imperatives were forcing educational systems intothe same mould. Today, at least as regards the nation-states of Western Europe, this hypothesiswould be seriously challenged. Yet, at its origins, there was a oneness in European education.The medieval scholastic guilds, forerunners of the universities, were instituted by masters andscholars who banded together precisely because so many were strangers in a strange land. Thegranting of a licence to teach everywhere—-facultas ubique docendi—bestowed upon the doctorsof Paris and Bologna, eventually became the prerogative of all studia generalia. These institutionsof the higher learning were frequented without discrimination by the scholars who moved freelybetween universities. Higher education was of the same pattern: the arts faculty, awarding thebaccalaureus and magister degrees, was the propedeutic one for the higher (and professional)faculties of theology, law and medicine, which alone conferred the doctorate. Such qualificationshad European validity. Today, within Europe such validity is denied. Nationality limits the rightto teach, the migration of scholars and professional men and women is restricted, and the equi-valence of qualifications is a political issue. Transmission, diffusion and generation of knowledgeand skills are subordinated to chauvinism. Despite the post-war growth of international organiza-tions dedicated to the fostering of cooperation and even integration in educational affairs, theplight of learning in this respect remains as before.

Three theories in international relations seem relevant to the question, 'Towards a EuropeanEducation System?' The first is a 'transactional' theory which simply states that the more contactstake place transnationally the greater the prospects are that countries will cooperate and consentto surrender part of their autonomy—in this case, their cultural autonomy. A striking example ofthis has been the mutual educational collaboration (outside the framework of the EEC) whichhas long existed between Bonn and Paris [1]. The Franco-German cultural agreement of 1954predates the Treaty of Rome. The Conference of Franco-German University Rectors, founded in1958, has held biennial meetings ever since. Its value was enhanced by the 1963 treaty of co-operation between France and the Federal Republic, whose cultural clauses envisaged cooperationin research, studies regarding the equivalence of diplomas and an intensification of the teachingof French and German. In 1964 was inaugurated a series of meetings between successive FrenchMinisters of Education and representatives of the Permanent Conference of Ministers of Educa-tion of the German Lander. This practice of regular consultation has continued.

The results of this practical exercise in 'transactional' or communications theory have beenimpressive, and are comparatively little known outside the two countries concerned. In highereducation reciprocal arrangements have been implemented to allow study in either country tocount for credit in French, German, classics and the three main sciences. In the University of the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

10:

49 0

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

212 Volume 10 No. 3 October 1974

Saar a centre for French law has been established, which both French and German students canattend and follow courses for a law degree. For engineering students exchanges will soon bepossible, as a result of the work of a joint committee of the French grandes ecoles and Germantechnological universities. (Article 2 of the Loid'orientation of 1968 reforming the French univer-sity system envisaged cooperation with other universities within the EEC, but it is mainly withthe Federal Republic that this has become reality.) At the school level a common universityentrance requirement, the Franco-German Abitur, has been realized. In lycees and Gymnasienbilingual sections have been established. These entail reinforced teaching of the other's language,and exchange teachers not only in languages, but giving instruction in geography, history andsocial studies. In the teaching of foreign languages generally the dominant position of Englishhas been maintained, but the teaching of French and German is now more widespread at alllevels from the kindergarten to the university. In order to promote contacts between youngpeople in the two countries the Franco-German Youth Organisation (Deutsch-franzosischesJugendwerk) was started in 1963 with a very generous budget. Cultural realizations of this kind,like trade transactions, exercise a 'multiplier effect'.

Such an effect is also apparent in the working out of a second theory, that of functionalism [2].This theory, elaborated by Mitrany after World War I, postulates that international agencies willflourish if they are established to serve concrete needs. These bodies must represent a type ofcooperation rather than integration. It follows that they will consist of national representativeswhose consent is required for any decisions that are formulated (and who may withdraw thatconsent at any time). There is no surrender of sovereignty and legal agreements are not supra-national, but inter-national. American neo-functionalists, such as Haas and Lindberg, who havelooked at Europeanism, postulate a policy of gradualism: if and when new international needsmake themselves felt—and not before— they will be satisfied.

The third theory of relevance to education is that of federalism, of which the chief Europeanproponents have been Brugmans and Spinelli. The characteristic of federal bodies is that of totalcooperation in all fields and closer integration in some. Such organisms possess real powers;their officials, who have the right of decision-taking, are not national representatives but supra-national; they possess their own legal order.

The three main international agencies in Europe which are most closely connected with educa-tional matters—the Organisation for European Cooperation and Development (OECD), theCouncil for Cultural Cooperation (CCC) of the Council of Europe, and the Directorate forResearch, Science and Education of the European Economic Communities (EEC)—illustratecharacteristics of both functionalism and federalism. The OECD best exemplifies a 'functionalist'approach. Although its membership includes non-European states such as the United States,Canada and Japan as well as a majority of European ones, the original focus of the organizationwas both European and economic. The preoccupation with economic matters led directly toone in science. Ministers of science who attended OECD conferences happened, as is the casewith Britain, often to be also ministers of education. Thus, if economics led directly to an interestin educational planning, that in science led to firstly an interest in science education and thento one in education in general, given concrete expression in 1968 by the creation of CERI—the OECD Centre for Educational Research and Innovation. It can therefore be seen that theeducational aspects of OECD represent an organic growth, with a continuing 'satisfaction ofneeds' in what has been termed a 'spill-over' effect.

In contrast, the CCC displays characteristics of both functionalism and federalism. Its establish-ment had been mooted by the European Conference of Ministers of Education which had beenstarted in 1959. In 1962 it was formally instituted, with the object of bringing the ideas, techniquesand achievements in education to the general notice of all its members, seeking to adapt them tothe needs of each individual country. Its role was therefore largely informative, although this wasbroadly interpreted. Thus, for example, Swedish experts in the teaching of English as a foreignlanguage went to Turkey to train language teachers. It has in fact pioneered new techniques oflanguage teaching as well as promoted studies in key areas of education such as school structures,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

10:

49 0

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

COMPARATIVE EDUCATION Volume10 No. 3 October 1974 213

higher, secondary, technical and vocational education, guidance, educational technology andexaminations, to name only a few areas of its activities. Practical and realistic, the CCC hasperformed a valuable function in dealing with educational 'needs' as they manifested themselvesas matters of common concern to its members.

Like the EEC, however (as we shall see later), it has been less successful in creating what mightbe termed a common educational policy among its members. Long before the EEC concerneditself with the equivalence of qualifications the CCC had entered this field. Two conventionswhich were elaborated remained ineffective because of political reasons. With the renewed interestin international mobility of students and professional workers the CCC is instituting a new pro-gramme in which the stress will be on academic equivalences, leaving the working out of theeffectus civilis of such equivalences to the EEC. To this end a network of national equivalencecentres (as recommended by the 1971 Conference of European Ministers of Education) may beset up to give information concerning systems of post-secondary education and admission re-quirements. Insofar as these centres will be informative rather than evaluatory the CCC isdeliberately limiting its role to that of the functional; it does not, for example, propose to deter-mine the content of what is taught, a proposal which, however, has been mooted within certainquarters of the EEC.

The main policy preoccupation of the EEC in education has indeed been the mutual recognitionof qualifications. This will be dealt with later. The principal defect of the EEC until recently ineducational matters is that the approach has been legalistic, with lawyers determining how theTreaty of Rome might be interpreted. The articles of the Treaty that impinge upon educationare well-known [3]. Some, such as Articles 118 and 128, which deal with collaboration betweenmember states on basic and advanced vocational training and lay down general principles forsuch training, have been assigned a low priority. Article 50, which concerns the exchange ofyoung workers between countries, does not present many difficulties, although implementationhas been slow. Article 48 deals with freedom of movement for workers (excluding public serviceemployees): this has presented problems in regard to migrant education, a state of affairs that thePolicy Document on education issued by the Commission in March 1974 now seeks to remedy.Article 57 (i), concerning directives for the mutual recognition of qualifications and the relatedArticle 52, concerning freedom of establishment for self-employed workers, professional andotherwise, have presented real stumbling blocks. What is surprising is that, in relation to education,Article 235 of the Treaty of Rome, which empowers the Council of Ministers, after a unanimousdecision and upon the proposition of the Commission (the permanent body of civil servants), todeal as it best thinks fit with any other matters not covered in the Treaty, has been so seldominvoked. It reflects the feeling that the political will to educational integration is at present weakin certain EEC member states, with the result that cooperation is the most that can be expectedin the foreseeable future. In recent months, moreover, there would seem to have been a consider-able shift in thinking within the Commission. Ralf Dahrendorf, the retiring Commissioner forscience, research and education, now asserts that the harmonization of European educationsystems, their structures and content is not only unrealistic but unnecessary. Likewise the JanneReport, 'For a Community Policy on Education', reiterates that national structures and theeducational traditions of member countries must be respected. There would seem to be a generalretreat from the 'federalist' arguments advanced in the mid-1960s.

This is not to say that the EEC has been without successes in the educational field, although thecreation of the European Schools and the European University Institute exemplify more the'functionalist' theory of cooperation than any 'federalist' aspirations. The European schoolshave been implanted where the institutions of the EEC are already in existence: in Luxembourg(coal and steel), in Brussels (headquarters of the EEC), in Karlsruhe and Mol (atomic energy),and in Varese and Bergen. The Brussels school has 2500 pupils, representing the large concentra-tion of European civil servants and their families—although some 200 children are admitted to theschool as pupils who do not come from member-states. How far the schools reflect the 'European

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

10:

49 0

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

214 Volume 10 No. 3 October 1974

idea' is difficult to say. Since they are divided each into national (or linguistic) sections—Dutch,French, German, Italian and now English, they must be considered as multinational rather thanEuronational. History and geography at secondary level are taught in a second working languagewhich the pupil must opt for, as well as his own. Languages are indeed a strength of the schools;most of the school leavers entering universities study languages. To some extent the curriculum is'Europeanized'. For example, history is taught by a teacher who is not a national of the countryor countries of the pupils whom he teaches; the course itself is intended to be supra-national andtends to a 'great-men' approach. Laudable attempts have been made at writing textbooks for theschools which are nationally 'neutral'—although it must be stressed that the schools do not seekto 'de-nationalize' pupils, but merely to give a 'European dimension' to their education. However,the schools have come in for sharp criticism. The curriculum has been criticized as being apragmatic hotchpotch: philosophy, for example, is alleged to have been included in it becausethe French so wished. English critics—particularly the proponents of 'specialization'—havedeclared it to be unwieldy, comprising too many subjects and lacking depth. (Surprisingly, how-ever, Britain signed the agreement on the Statute of European Schools in September 1972 andBritish teachers are now officially seconded to them.) The clientele of the schools has been held tobe too middle-class (although the school at Mol has as pupils the children of 200 Italian workersand there are some children of industrial workers in the school at Luxembourg), and, it is alleged,they do not encourage sufficiently the mixing of nationalities. Although the school at Luxembourgruns a technical course, this is not popular with middle-class parents. The schools have their ownsecondary leaving examination, the European Baccalaureate (not to be confused with the Inter-national Baccalaureate) success in which gives a qualification for university entrance in all EECcountries—although it does not confer automatic right of entrance to higher education. To theFrench and British authorities the high rate of success in this examination—in 1973, 193 out of220 candidates passed: 88 per cent—must prove embarrassing, since the success rates in theirown national leaving examinations are considerably lower. How this kind of examination, whichis taken in between eight and twelve subjects, accords with English ideas on specialization at theupper secondary level is difficult to say: follow-up studies of candidates at British universities tosee whether degree performance was affected by the broader curriculum would be required.Doubtless the NUT in Britain, viewing the proceedings from afar, fear for the autonomy of theteacher in the classroomand of the pupil in relation to his choice of curriculum [14]. Nevertheless,the schools have flourished and bear witness to the success of a 'gradualist' policy in educationalmatters.

The idea of a European University (or, more precisely, a university institute) is also about to berealized, twenty years after it was first mooted in 1955 by the Germans in the initial discussionsthat led up to the creation of the EEC. To some extent it will duplicate the functions already under-taken by the College of Europe at Bruges which was developed by Henri Brugmans, the advocateof European federalism. Although a private institution predating the EEC (it was founded in 1949),the College has taken the lead in providing courses in the institutions and culture of Europe.However, the university institute to be set up in Florence has had a chequered origin [5].Article 9 (2) of the Treaty of Rome envisaged the creation of an institution of university level inconnexion with nuclear research, to form part of the European Atomic Energy Community. Thissparked off ideas for wider cultural cooperation, so that at Bonn in 1961 and at the Rome summitconference in May 1967 of the EEC finally the concept of a European university emerged. One ofthe main tasks of the institute, due to open in 1975, will be to train future administrators for theBerlaymont Building in Brussels. Courses will deal particularly with Europe, its culture, history,law, economics and institutions. There will also be facilities for research. Students, all post-graduate, will be taught by a professorial body of mixed nationalities headed by the well-knownEuropeanist, Max Kohnstamm.

It is surely by the progressive creation of such schools and university institutes that greaterEuropean cooperation can occur, although much must happen before any central body—perhaps

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

10:

49 0

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

COMPARATIVE EDUCATION Volume 10 No. 3 October 1974 215

the Conference of European Ministers of Education—can take on the functions performed, forexample, by the Permanent Conference of Ministers of Education in Bonn or the U.S. Office ofEducation, both of which are organs of federal states.

One of the key questions in this respect, which was referred to earlier, is the equivalence ofqualifications between member countries of the EEC, which has now defeated the best efforts ofBrussels civil servants for years. The former legalistic approach to the problem has already beenmentioned; the advent of the United Kingdom and Ireland to the Community not only had theeffect of calling into question all previous work on the question, so great are the differences ofapproach between the 'offshore islands' and the Continent, but also produced a more pragmaticstance.

The problem of equivalences [6] has at least three aspects:(a) the recognition or acceptability of qualifications for a wide range of occupations.(b) the recognition or acceptability of studies (usually, but not necessarily, at the level of higher

or postsecondary education) carried out in one country in order to enable a student toundertake studies at a higher level, whether of the same order or not, in a different country.

(c) the recognition or acceptability of qualifications giving high professional status. Suchrecognition or acceptability will also usually depend, wholly or partly, upon antecedentstudies.

In none of these three aspects has significant progress been registered as yet within the EEC. Thetentative solutions that have been propounded have stirred up the strongest opposition amongBritish educationists. In the House of Lords and elsewhere Lord Bowden has spoken out againstany attempt to standardize education as a means of solving the problem. Lord Beaumont ofWhitley has spoken of 'Continental drift'. Both the Committee of Vice-Chancellors [7] and theAssociation of University Teachers have been suspicious that standardization would mean the endof the autonomy of British universities and the dictation of the content of courses from outside.One Vice-Chancellor, Dr. Albert Sloman (who is also President of the Standing Conference ofRectors and Vice-Chancellors of European Universities) said already in December 1971 that thework of the EEC in this field had been based on the assumption that a gradual harmonization of(university) courses was necessary and desirable. No less than academic freedom has been deemedby many to be at stake.

Even in establishing equivalences for normal vocational qualifications the EEC has encounteredgreat difficulties [8]. A 'job profile' for machine tool operators, specifying what skills and whatcourses and examinations should be passed, took almost three years to elaborate and was thenvirtually disregarded by the Six (as they then were) of the EEC. (Incidentally, the Council ofEurope has now also entered this field. In March 1974 the Committee of Ministers of the Councilaccepted a draft convention relating to the mutual recognition of qualifications needed by motormechanics working on light vehicles [9]. The documents set out a job description, trainingprogramme and examination requirements for motor mechanics. But the convention can, in thecase of the Council of Europe, only be commended by the Ministers to their governments, and isnot mandatory upon them. If it were implemented it would affect three million motor mechanicsworking in Western Europe and some 65 million private car owners—not to mention the motoringorganizations' 'Get-you-home-from-Europe Service'! As it happens, the City and Guilds Institutehas just sponsored a European comparison of the training needed for motor vehicle servicework [10], It demonstrates that the training time is at present not very comparable. In France amotor vehicle mechanic must serve a two-year apprenticeship and have 720 hours part-timeschooling. In West Germany apprenticeship lasts three years and part-time schooling may rangefrom 960-1440 hours. In the Netherlands apprenticeship lasts two years, with 740 hours schooling,in Belgium up to four years, with the amount of day-release schooling unspecified. Furthermore,whereas in the four countries mentioned the final qualification is a State one, and legally protected,in Britain this is not the case [11J.)

The second case cited above concerned the recognition of postsecondary studies: students wish

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

10:

49 0

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

216 Volume 10 No. 3 October 1974

to intercalate, or complete, their studies in a country other than their own. The most usual reasonfor their wising to do so is probably the lack of facilities for study in their own country. Thisapplies to the candidate for a specialist qualification in a branch of medicine no less than to thestudent who spends a year abroad in order to perfect his knowledge of a foreign language. In afew cases a student goes abroad because he cannot obtain admission to a particular course inhis own country. Thus in the 1960s a number of would-be German medical students found a placein Austrian medical faculties. With some the prestige of an institution acts as a magnet or specialfacilities are offered: in the 1960s also, Turkish engineering students went to Vienna. There is nodoubt moreover that the 'finishing school' syndrome operates for the privileged few: the type ofeducation offered and the cachet that an institution imparts tempt the wealthy to go outside theirown country for higher education. Whatever the reason, for all students the problem of equiva-lences resolves itself into one firstly of entrance qualifications. Will their previous educationalexperience be recognized as being on a par with that of the national of the country in which theywish to study? Other questions are part of the same problem. Will the qualification acquiredabroad be recognized when the student returns home? Will part studies abroad count towards aqualification at home? If the student acquires a foreign qualification will he be allowed to stayin the country where he has studied and practise the profession for which he has qualified? Thusin some cases the problem of equivalences relates to whether previous studies have been identical—a rare possibility—or whether there is comparability and acceptability within limits of'tolerance',to use an engineering metaphor. In the latter case, questions of quantity and of quality (whichinvolves value judgements) are raised. Lastly, there is the straightforward question of legalrecognition. Posed in these terms, the matter of equivalences is therefore extremely complicated.Yet in the European context it can hardly be posed differently.

It has not yet been demonstrated whether the problem of equivalences in an actual or potentialone. We have not sufficient data to know how many students from, say, within the EEC area arestudying in the countries of other member-states. On a world-wide scale, however, it is knownthat between 1960 and 1968 the number of foreign students abroad almost doubled to 440,000 andit is hazarded that by the end of 1974 this number will have topped the million mark [12]. InWestern Europe it is also known that certain countries had in 1967 a student population a con-siderable proportion of which came from abroad [13]. In descending order the figures are:

Proportion ofCountry foreign students

Switzerland 24-8 per centAustria 19-9 per centUnited Kingdom 9-2 per centFrance 7-2 per centFederal Republic of Germany 6-5 per centSpain 6-0 per cent

These foreign students, many of whom must have come from the Third World, were studyingmainly in the following fields: humanities, engineering, social sciences, medicine, physical andbiological sciences. But no detailed study of the intra-European movement of students, theirreasons for studying abroad, the qualifications they acquired and the difficulties they encounteredin acquiring them has yet been made.

The third aspect of the equivalences problem relates to the recognition of high professionalqualifications, which is particularly important in view of the right of free establishment withinthe EEC of self-employed persons. In a flurry of activity just before Britain entered the EEC draftdirectives regarding the procedures for the mutual recognition of qualifications were drawn up by

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

10:

49 0

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

COMPARATIVE EDUCATION Volume 10 No. 3 October 1974 217

the Commission of the EEC in Brussels. These proposals dealt with the following occupations:doctors, dentists, pharmacists, veterinary surgeons, nurses, opticians, engineers, architects. Themethod of devising these draft directives was that of comparability, using quantitative criteria suchas the number of years of training involved, the total number of hours, the subjects which wereregarded as compulsory, the number of hours of instruction given to each subject, and the generalconditions of training. The snags in this approach are self-evident. In those cases where the criteriaprescribe minimal requirements, will these not in fact become maximum requirements in thefuture? How can the criteria be accurately evaluated? Is the criterion of hours of training to bereckoned in clock-hours or 'academic' hours? The same title to a course in a given subject doesnot necessarily entail that the content will be the same, or even similar. Should not post-qualifica-tion experience come into the reckoning? After all, the qualification merely represents a provisional'end-statement', showing the holder's capacity at a given moment in time. Should not linguisticcompetence be evaluated? Will not certain professions become devalued as the unemployed ofone country (where there is a surfeit of their particular expertise) move to another where there is ashortage? What of the question of liberality or Malthusianism as practised for entrance to pro-fessional training? In some countries the entrance hurdles to a profession such as medicine arestiffer than others, in the sense that university selection and entry to medical school are morestringent. Is it fair that one country should be invaded by foreign doctors when good studentswithin the country are being denied the facilities to train? Here the comparative numbers incertain branches of higher education are all-important. In some countries some professionalactivities are legally protected, in others they are not. Indeed, there are so many qualitative criteriathat are raised by the very use of quantitative criteria that any precision becomes impossible.

The draft directives, therefore, as originally conceived, were nonsensical. For example, forveterinary surgeons a minimum five-year course lasting at least 4500 hours was prescribed, con-sisting of instruction in twenty-one different subjects; for each of these subjects the number ofhours was laid down in detail—thus 200 hours had to be devoted to the study of the inspectionand control of foodstuffs of animal origin. The draft directive for accountancy, as drawn up,would have disqualified some 50,000 of the chartered and certified accountants at present prac-tising in Britain and Ireland.

The British case against the draft directives was both as to their principle and to their unwork-ability in practice. On the Continent the powers of professional bodies are circumscribed; theright to award humble qualifications no less than university degrees is often reserved to the Statealone. This is in contrast to Britain, where there are at least 27 professional organizations involved,many of whom receive their authority by royal charter. The future of these bodies is thereforeat stake. No less in question is the autonomy of the universities, which in Britain has always beenjealously guarded. This does seem to be in jeopardy when one prominent official of the EEC hasgone on record as saying that he hoped there would be a common first-year curriculum in allEuropean universities!

The latest statement (June 1974) on the question of equivalences within the EEC seems torepresent an abandonment of the rigid criteria approach and a more 'laisser faire' attitude: allqualifications of all member countries giving the right to practise a profession will be recognizedthroughout the EEC, if this is accepted. Committees are to be set up for each profession toexamine national credentials. If this is to be more than a mere formality some procedures mustbe elaborated. It is here urged that what should be adopted is the principle of 'functional com-parability'.

One procedure that might be followed is that of an 'accreditation' system. Ultimately allequivalences must be validated by political agreements. But before this final stage can be reacheda number of steps must be taken, the chief of which is the certification that the foreign qualifica-tion for which recognition is sought does actually 'qualify' a person to operate in a differentcultural and national context. Can the person perform the job for which the qualification wasawarded in the new country in which he now elects to reside? One way of achieving this is to

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

10:

49 0

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

218 Volume 10 No. 3 October 1974

form groups of institutions to constitute an 'accrediting' agency. Within the consortium thus setup member institutions accept the validity of qualifications granted by each other. This doesmean the mutual scrutiny of the content of courses. One may take the example of the foreigndoctor. He should not be allowed to practise in another country unless that country is satisfiedthat he is capable of operating within their own specifications. If the foreign doctor cannotactually meet these (within certain agreed limits) he should be required to undertake supplemen-tary courses of study in those areas of knowledge where he is manifestly not up to the localstandard. To propose this is not to cast doubt upon the general value of the foreign qualification;it is merely to say that the qualification is not sufficient in a specific context. It would be acceptedwithout question, for instance, that a European doctor moving to a tropical area should acquirea knowledge of local medical conditions before being allowed to practise. Such a procedure doesnot imply a standardization of programmes, content of courses and methods of work, but rather atrue 'harmonization', in which what is at stake is a 'pedagogical' or educational equivalence basedon functionalism [14]. If such a principle were to be accepted, the sole remaining issue would bewhether such supplementary education should be undertaken in the 'home' country before theprofessional leaves for abroad, or in the 'host' country. This is clearly a matter upon which therecould be great flexibility. But to arrive at this final stage a very detailed comparative study ofcourses of training would be required. This in itself might lead to some interesting cross-fertilization of ideas.

A corollary of this might be the establishment for certain categories of people of a 'studiespassport'—what Guiton terms a 'curriculum vitae, studiorum et artium'. This would be a kindof transcript, not only of studies followed but of relevant experience since a qualification wasacquired. Raoul F. Kneucker has drawn attention to the fact that the student record book, as itexists in German and Swiss universities, is in fact just such a 'laisser passer'.

The question of equivalences within Europe and within the EEC has been treated in somedetail because it illustrates the great complexity of the problems that educational cooperationthrows up. The way in which the question has been handled in the past illustrates how a 'federalist'approach, based here on legalism, is completely inappropriate. Educational unity (which must bedistinguished from unification) must be based on cultural unity, which is the result of an organicprocess. A European education system is still a long way off if by this are meant common struc-tures, programmes, and the whole apparatus of a common organization. It is perhaps a consum-mation never devoutly to be wished. Yet a return to a common discourse of culture and knowledge,such as existed in the pre-national history of Europe, is surely worth striving for [15].

REFERENCES AND NOTES

[1] The history of Franco-German cultural and educational relations can be followed in Kulturpolitikder Länder, Bonn. (Annual Reports of the Permanent Conference of German Ministers of Education.)

[2] Such theories are discussed in: Carole Webb, 'Theories about European integration: a layman'sguide', European Community, no. 7/8, July/August, 1973.

[3] Cf. DE CRAYENCOUR (1970), 'La reconnaissance mutuelle des diplômes dans le traité de Rome',Revue du Marché Commun, no. 137, October 1970.

[4] Cf. F. JARVIS (1972), The Educational implications of membership of the EEC, National Union ofTeachers (NUT).

[5] Its origins are described in P. REUTER (1970), Organisations européennes, Paris, 2nd ed., p. 383.[6] The best discussion of the problem is given in the Introduction by J. GUITON to: Les études supéri-

eures: présentation comparative des régimes d'enseignement et des diplômes, UNESCO, Paris, 1973.[7] Cf. 'The European Communities and Higher Education', Memorandum prepared by the Committee

of Vice-Chancellors and Principals, reprinted in Oxford University Gazette, October 26, 1972.[8] An excellent review of vocational education is given in P. PERRY (1972), Vocational Training in the

European Economic Community, British Association for Commercial and Industrial Education,London.

Cf. also: W. D. HALLS (December, 1972), 'Technical Education, Equivalence of Qualifications andthe Common Market', BACIE Journal.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

10:

49 0

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

COMPARATIVE EDUCATION Volume 10 No. 3 October 1974 219

[9] Council of Europe: Resolution (73)46 of Committee of Ministers, 'On European Equivalence ofProfessional Titles for "Light Vehicle Mechanics" '.

[10] D. E. WHEATLEY (1974), Road Transport Engineering in Four EEC Countries, The Institute of RoadTransport Engineers.

[11] For a study of vocational qualifications, cf. C. C. DE KAYSER, J. A. C. FALLEYN, J. M. GOETHALS (1970),Comparative Repertory of European Qualifications, Vol. I. France & United Kingdom, Louvain.[Volumes for other countries to follow.]

[12] Cf. A. TRAPERO (1974), 'From Equivalence to Evaluation: appraising the man, not the diploma',UNESCO Chronicle, XX, 4.

[13] See note (6).[14] Cf. W. D. HALLS (1972), International Equivalences in Access to Higher Education. UNESCO, Paris.[15] The most up-to-date and thorough discussion of education in Britain and the EEC is in: M. HART,

The EEC and Secondary Education in the United Kingdom, Occasional Paper No. 3 of the F. L. AllenMemorial Trust, Headmasters' Association, 29 Gordon Square, London (60p).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

10:

49 0

8 O

ctob

er 2

014