1.	The development of higher education in Europe in the 21st century is perceived as being a very complex process as the case studies demonstrate. The case studies are drawn from across Europe, and reveal significant differences in institutional starting points for a number of reasons.
	The imperatives and challenges arising from particular geographical locations within Europe (e.g. Balkans, Baltic, Western Europe, Central Europe) imply different cultural and political contexts in terms of governmental traditions, political reconstruction and democratisation, stability, economic buoyancy etc. The diversity of institutional traditions (e.g. the Humboldtian tradition, the polytechnic-högeskol tradition) is clearly an important factor in presenting a facilitating environment or constraints to developments of particular types.
	Variations in institutional autonomy and the capacity for self-managed change, and, by definition, variations in the scope and nature of public accountability provide both incentives towards and barriers against entrepreneurial and creative approaches to emerging issues.
	The diversity of wealth and the resource base of universities provides a critical backcloth to the exploration of possibilities.
	Finally, the age and maturity of universities and the stability of their positions in national systems may provide constraints to change, and conversely, the security to experiment.
2.	Notwithstanding, the cases reveal a series of relatively similar elements of common mission, from which base diversity is expressed, but surprisingly similar assumptions are being made about the nature of future trends affecting university development and the character of likely patterns of university activity over the next decade A high number of responding institutions are engaged in some form or other of internal strategic planning and re-think, both for intrinsic reasons, and in response to initiatives from national higher education planners (university or agency). This reflects a growing systematisation of institutional management. There are varying degrees of sophistication with regard to strategic management, and this, in itself, will be a principal institutional concern in terms of instrumentation over the next two decades.
3.	The cases reflect a general assumption of the role universities have to play in societal development in respect of cultural and intercultural cohesion, developing human resources, technological change, economic progress and regeneration, particularly in terms of exploiting the potential of innovative information and communication technologies for academic development and delivery, institutional networking, and intellectual connections. This is all encouraging at institutional level : translating these broad strategic values into reality at the level of departments and individuals is another thing, although it must not be forgotten that one of the traditional strengths of the university is its ability to respond organically at low levels in the institution, however chaotically at times.
4.	There is evidence that universities across the continent are responding to similar environmental challenges and imperatives, and are realising a common destiny through continental and global co-operation. There is equally evidence of a differentiation of mission beyond the common core elements of under- and postgraduate teaching; research of various categories; professional training; developing students and staff who have competencies to change society and the organisations in which they work; community service — broadly defined to include continuing education, research and technology transfer, economic development; and helping society understand itself. The fact that the whole sample of institutions largely embrace these roles is in itself an indication that evolving conventional wisdom is now largely continental in nature.
5.	The differentiation referred to encompasses departures from the core in terms of a number of elements. Some institutions will espouse an overt involvement in national political and societal reconstruction — the democratisation/liberalisation role — because of particular historical evolution. Particular definitions of social and economic relevance pertinent to the precise setting can be expected — and this is healthy. Different positions on the spectrum of elitism to mass provision will inevitably be found, and this has huge implications for size, financing, student and staff recruitment and marketing policies. The balance between institutional conservative and reforming traditions (in respect of societal commitment) is likely to be a controversial issue within and without the universities. Variations in student profile, and the mix of delivery mechanisms (including distance learning) are already very apparent as is a significant variation in the balance between the regional, national and international foci of activity. There will be a choice between universalist comprehensive or niche approaches to particular market opportunities. The diversity of resource/income streams and the implications for patterns of stakeholder influence will be a natural consequence of the above, and will raise questions of academic freedom vis-à-vis particular benefactors.
6.	Institutional profiling or branding may thus become more significant than institutional categories, and attention to image and identity and its marketability in response to environmental changes is likely to pre-occupy institutional leaders more, as the century progresses. This is discussed further in paragraph 18.
7.	Across the universities represented in the cases, there appears to be a series of fairly common assumptions about future development which have both interlocking causes and consequences. This adds to the complexity of the situation, and the inevitability of ambiguity, uncertainty, and the need for experimentation and risk-taking by university leaders. This, of itself, will fuel diversity of approaches but, viewed sensibly, should also provide a rich source of comparative evidence on good practice which, properly evaluated, should lead to effective cross-fertilisation of ideas across the continent.
	The latter point places considerable obligations on IGO’s and NGO’s to ensure this is done effectively, through evaluative studies, regional training, conferences and other relevant means. We now discuss some of these assumptions in more details, and these observations are made in no particular order of priority.
8.	The demand for the quality services of higher education across Europe will certainly rise. The evidence for this is based inter alia, on: surges in participation rates in HE of school leavers in certain countries; increased access to HE of hitherto underprivileged groups — or non participants; widespread acceptance of lifelong learning for professional updating, career change, credit accumulation, postgraduate study, co-operative education; the competency movement and growing concern about emerging mismatches in the demand and supply of highly trained personnel, especially in areas of economic growth or turnaround. These factors are especially clear in the cases of Catania, Catalunya, Dresden, Cluj, Dublin City, etc. and constitute the driving forces behind so-called "massification" i.e., the expansion of higher education systems, provision and institutions. The nature of expansion for institutions is likely to vary considerably. From the above, it clearly means the development of new learning techniques, delivery mechanisms, and enhanced (and different staff competencies). There will also be structural ramifications.
	For particular universities, this may mean vertical growth (more of the same), horizontal growth (broadening of the academic spectrum) or both. Each is likely to call for different structural configurations in terms of decentralised internal structures, a realignment with other institutions, and, in certain cases, mergers or federations.
9.	Research is widely accepted as an essential element in mission, but certain broad trends may be seen. The Humboldtian principle of each academic doing teaching and research (Dresden, Helsinki) may not be espoused by all universities within a differentiated structure of mission, and applied research may have become the focus of some institutions with particular missions. Research is becoming very costly — hence the tendencies towards selectivity or concentration; strong national centres with international reputations; institutional research niches; industrial funding for research through a variety of mechanisms and organisations; competition for research funds at an unprecedented level; and international strategic alliances for the most effective exploitation of know-how. The Helsinki and Copenhagen Business School cases discuss these choices in detail.
	The detailed implications are discussed in Chapter 2.
10.	Government’s ability to pay for expanded HE systems is at best, in steady state, and for various reasons in most systems, likely to decrease absolutely or relatively to the size of demand. The consequences are profound, as the cases of Bremen, Cluj, Basel, Dublin City, Debrecen, Crete, and the University College South Stockholm demonstrate. There will certainly be enhanced competition for public funds for teaching and research; the development of indicator/formula based/output/performance based budgeting from government; diversified sources of institutional funding; and reduced units of resource per student. This is likely to generate institutional pressure group activity for funding within some systems (e.g. established v. new universities), with increased competition for students, staff and funds. The issue of salary parity with private sector will become exacerbated, and the movement towards student funding of his/her education, loans etc. will gain momentum. For institutions, the search for more cost effective delivery patterns (e.g. IT based) will accelerate, and concerns about determination of quality — of provision and infrastructure will heighten. Privatised developments of HE (private universities, endowed faculties, institutes) with consequences for governance, freedom, autonomy and ability to respond quickly, are already apparent in some systems. Finally, a change in institutional culture, from the collegial and bureaucratic to the corporate and entrepreneurial is highly likely, with all its side-effects.
11.	Because of the above, and other related factors, a redefinition of the respective roles of state and university, and a shift towards greater institutional autonomy and self determination can already be discerned, through the advance of "market" philosophies towards higher education; global budgeting related to performance budgeting; differentiated missions of institutions; deregulation in critical areas of personnel or financial controls by government in some systems; and through the emergence of institutional "performance contracts" with government.
	Governments may be favourably disposed to more autonomy for conflicting reasons. In some cases, their commitment stems from a genuine belief in self determination. In others, it stems from a desire to facilitate the guardianship of scientific integrity and the globalisation of higher education, as seems to be evident in the cases of Crete, Basel, Bremen and Helsinki.
12.	The globalisation of teaching, learning and research, is widely believed to be inevitable, giving rise to a whole series of consequences. Among these would seem to be the realisation that there are global markets for students, and thus the facilitation of international student mobility, with associated issues of mobility schemes within EU and between EU and other regions is to be regarded as the norm. This certainly implies a search for interconnected sequences of degrees, diplomas etc. and for recognition, including professional recognition, a need already exacerbated by the growing availability, through Internet, of world class programmes in each country. This has a consequent effect on local providers. These programmes may be overt competition, or the result of co-operation between local provider and international player. Whereas there has always been a healthy amount of faculty mobility and exchange, strategic alliances between institutions which are providers on a global basis, to provide connections and strengths which may not be feasible on a national basis, is certainly likely to accelerate. Finally the cases from Bremen, Dresden, Catania, Helsinki and Copenhagen Business School demonstrate that one of the principal roles institutions will play is that of a knowledge broker in a swiftly expanding international knowledge market.
13.	This globalization has particular resonance in the European context, where several respondents refer to their university’s aspirations to be the best of the "European tradition". The language imperative is clearly strong, and the concept of universities as not only centres of, but incubators of cultural diversity, multi-racial harmony and understanding and democratic values is well enshrined.
14.	Sub-continental imperatives may also be discerned - universities as the instruments for the globalisation of the Eastern Mediterranean areas, or the fulcrum between the Mediterranean and Europe, or the means of assisting Baltic or Balkan cohesion. Universities cannot be said to be overly modest of their possible roles in this regard (Helsinki, Erciyes, Tartu), but these roles clearly require considerable resourcing, and such a status is not seized, but earned.
15.	The university is widely recognised to be a significant player in national regions, which in turn are perceived to be major future influences on universities. Synergy is clearly implied, with potential mutual benefit to universities and their various stakeholders. A number of dimensions of significance emerge, including the role of universities in regional economic development or regeneration, through technology transfer, SME development, continuing/co-operative education, applied contract research; universities as agents of urban development (built environment); universities as economic generators - local employment services etc.; and universities as cultural providers and brokers.
	On the other hand, regions provide income to universities for these services, and are essential outlets for academic creativity (Sheffield Hallam, Pau, Porto, Dublin City).
16.	A number of interesting issues are nonetheless posed for the university in a regional setting, as follows :
	Is the university perceived as being able to solve almost any regional problem? This would seem to be both an issue of realistic expectations, as well as one of credibility. The nature of specific regions vary in terms of growth rate and wealth and this, therefore, raises questions about the most appropriate roles which universities can play in relation to the sophistication and need of the particular region. Whilst many universities may have sophisticated ambitions in terms of what they may wish to do in their region on, say, technology transfer, this presumes they have an industrial infrastructure to work with. This is not always the case. The reverse is also true. In many cases, the university may perceive itself to be the ideal point of contact between the global and the regional but it is not too clear in some cases what lies behind the rhetoric.
17.	The sustainable development of the university into the next century is seen as one of the principal challenges. Many have limits to their own sustainability because of their size and vulnerability; their discipline base; and their credibility in the face of these challenges. It has already been observed that international/national regional strategic alliances for co-operation in teaching, research or service can potentially resolve this. On a regional basis, inter-institutional networking, multi-urban networking, and co-operative networking with industry may increasingly provide the required synergy and outcomes. Various models of each type of network are identified in the cases.
	Several institutions have missions which admit of sub-university work as a component in their total profile. Others are geared up for flexibility and systematic articulation with "non universities", through credit transfer and "modularization". Both these elements are likely to contribute significantly to institutions’ sustainable development.
	However, market economies for HE have their own competitive characteristics where self interest is a strong motive. Strategic alliances need much cultivation to survive and flourish. They may, regionally, eventually need to be legitimised by governments as federal universities, as the Debrecen case illustrates.
18.	In para. 4, reference was made to evidence of growing differentiation of mission around common core elements. The institutional case studies sometimes seek a particular identity through the use of brand names or sub-titles which sum up the basic stance or style of the university concerned e.g.: the "performance university" (Basel), "promoting the scientific realisation of society"; the "application-oriented university" (Bremen); the "professional university" (Sheffield Hallam); the "learning university" (Copenhagen Business School).
	This is clearly related to a public declaration of institutional position. The definitions do also imply aspects of internal style encompassing significant elements of internal behaviour - innovation, flexibility, sharings, initiative taking and experimentation on a broad front. The fact that universities are thinking along these lines demonstrates a degree of acceptance of marketing metaphors, which is likely to spread.
19.	The final point to be made relates to the multiple institutional objectives implied by the series of statements about mission. Within restricted resource bases, tension will undoubtedly be created between new market related activities and the traditional mainstream activities. The need for prioritisation will become apparent (Catania, Copenhagen Business School). Several see the tension being partly resolved through the designation of niche areas especially for R & D in which genuine excellence may be attained (Tartu, Crete, Dublin City).
	One university looks to the day when a "return to traditional functions" will take place after social and political service has been rendered to the emerging society. One would have to say this is extremely unlikely, and, because of the force of the external factors of the early 21st century, these movements are likely to be irreversible. If this is indeed the case, we presumably in 5-10 years will be trying to conceptualise what the "post-market" university will look like — at the same time as some universities may still be struggling to find their feet with market forces. This is probably an inevitable consequence of globalisation and the introduction of market forces into higher education. The preservation and enrichment of basic university traditions seems all the more important, given this scenario.
CHAPTER 2
TEACHING AND LEARNING
1.	References have been made in preceding paragraphs to the expected high level of systematic demand for university provision – the so-called "massification". The consequences of this are particular apparent in the teaching and learning domain. The case studies produce some interesting evidence, of which one dominant theme is that there is no reason why massification should necessarily lead to dubious quality standards, as long as quality assurance philosophies and instruments are built into proceedings from the beginning. A wide range of approaches to sustain quality are apparent from the cases to which we now turn.
	Some universities seek to retain a high selectivity in entrance requirements, by maintaining an elitist orientation (Jagiellonian University of Cracow), or only part espousal of massification (Helsinki, Basel). This is precluded in certain settings (Turkey) because of national central admissions processes. Other institutions confine massification to certain curriculum areas (Tartu).
	The policy of redefinition of "massification" as "education for the masses" (Copenhagen Business School) or, not as "mass standardisation", but as "mass culture, with individually profiled learning experiences" (Porto) is creative and promising. These redefinitions clearly require a substantial paradigm shift in the philosophy of learning, and produce considerable personnel challenges. Funding reform is clearly a means of sustaining quality and funding of the expansion through increased not decreased resources per capita, through the introduction of a fee structure (Bremen, or Catalunya and Catania) or loans (UK) has potential, if governments permit it. This is seen by Tartu as also providing an essential means of supporting students from low income groups. The funding of expansion of part-time education through the extensive involvement of industrial stakeholders in co-operative/in-company education (Pau, Sheffield Hallam) i.e. the acquisition of industrial funds, has additional merit in that it also introduces a quality assurance dimension.
	Several universities see structural reform of the curriculum as having the desired effect of maintaining quality. Catholic University of Louvain, Sheffield Hallam and Catalunya provide a clear staged degree structure where the first stage of cycle is designed as a bridge from school studies - an introduction to learning methods and conceptual foundations which is designed to minimise drop-out. Others provide a pre-university degree year for the school leaver, fulfilling similar purposes to the above, (Catania’s so-called zero courses) or become involved in sub university level work (Dresden).
	The principal challenge, of course, is ensuring student exit levels are as qualitatively high as previously, through a careful pre-definition of learning outcomes (Sheffield Hallam), competencies (Heerlen) or transportable skills (Copenhagen Business School) as definitive quality measures, rather than focusing principally on entry standards. In many universities, this is associated with reform of learning methods with a strong emphasis on self managed learning, materials and IT resource support. The normal development of quality assurance processes, of course, is integral to any of the above, and an element in this is the provision of greatly extended guarantees and assistance to the student body (Sheffield Hallam’s Student Charter and Partnership in Learning).
	This is a highly complex and difficult area, and it is clear that universities can be blown off course by a series of internal and external factors. However, massification needs not necessarily lead to a diminution of quality.
2.	These approaches are, of course, not mutually exclusive, and make great demands on staff, students and institutional capacities for conceptualising and managing educational innovation. It appears to be widely recognised in the cases that the traditional models of university education, whether from the Humboldtian or other traditions, have definite limitations when confronted with the combination of massification and declining resource bases (Debrecen, Jagiellonian University of Cracow, Cluj, University College of South Stockholm, Debrecen, Dublin City, Copenhagen Business School and Erciyes). The particular limitations quoted include the conventional pattern of large lectures, seminars and laboratory work; fixed standard closed curricula; rigid examination regimes; the tyranny of the single discipline; common start and finish times for student cohorts; and the limitations of written teaching materials.
3.	The following paragraphs demonstrate the planned responses of a wide selection of European universities to these challenges as they unfold over the next decade. In the light of the above, universities are very conscious of some difficult dilemmas. The almost geometric expansion of the knowledge base in higher education poses huge problems of keeping up to date and investing in knowledge resources. The limitations of their own staff capacity and discipline coverage, even in the case of the large comprehensive university (Helsinki) means that no university can hope to cover the entire knowledge spectrum, whilst the need to develop new fields of study - new disciplines and multi-disciplinary fields places severe challenges on leadership abilities to move discipline based structures into innovative developments.
4.	This juxtaposition of these factors poses some interesting strategic issues and tensions, and there is helpful evidence on promising approaches. One is the limited development of new fields of multi-disciplinary study from the stimulation of synergy between existing foci (Basel : ecological studies, biotechnology), especially where these correspond to market opportunities. This is seen as a means of sustaining critical masses in key subject areas. Another is the addition of new disciplines perceived as critical to the university’s contribution to society — a form of horizontal diversification (Jagiellonian University of Cracow, University College of South Stockholm, Debrecen). We have already cited as likely developments the accessing of wider learning networks, through strategic alliances with other universities with complementary disciplines (Catalunya); extensive use of Internet arrangements (Copenhagen Business School); and the possibility of institutional mergers over the next decade to facilitate the creation of regional critical mass.
	Accessing the knowledge base of industry, especially where professional/vocational training is a core element in institutional mission (Pau, Porto, Sheffield Hallam), is an important development, but difficult to bring off.
	The debate on the relationship between research and teaching is rather one-sided in the cases represented : the link, it is universally assumed, is umbilical. Research is held to be critical to curriculum development, staff vitality, industry/service linked consultancy and the stimulation of learning experiences for students (Helsinki, Sheffield Hallam, Tartu, University College of South Stockholm — an interesting cross-section of university types).
5.	Another planned area of extension of educational provision is that of postgraduate study. The motives are varied. It is seen as a natural consequence of life-long learning development to deal with specialised career needs beyond the first degree level (Copenhagen Business School), particularly of an inter-disciplinary nature (Bremen, Cluj). Potentially, it is an area capable of self-funding beyond the scope of normal public support, via industrial sources (Sheffield Hallam, Catholic University of Louvain) or through international sources (Dresden). It is also widely agreed that Ph.D.’s are an indispensable means of developing the next generation of researchers, especially where the age profile of current staff is seen as an issue (Catholic University of Louvain).
	It is likely that greater systematisation of calibration or structure will emerge in respect of courses. Reference has already been made to the three cycles/stages of Sheffield Hallam and Catholic University of Louvain, with the third cycle corresponding to postgraduate level work. This would be compatible with the modularisation and "unitisation" of the undergraduate curriculum (see para. 6 of this Chapter).
6.	A common expectation is that the university curriculum will increasingly be cast in terms, not only of the cognitive mastery of disciplines, assessed through conventional examination processes, but in terms of skills and competencies, irrespective of the discipline, beyond the traditional ones of analysis and independent thinking (Helsinki). Among the general competencies identified are : seeking and processing information; discerning the essential from the inessential; ability to operate in different cultures; ability to manage change in a variety of settings; creativity; ethical attitudes; ability to work in and manage multi-disciplinary project teams and problem solving (Helsinki, Heerlen, Catholic University of Louvain, Cluj). This development resonates, of course, with life long learning and the development of transferable skills. In the UK system, a complex national system of competencies is being evolved through the so-called National Vocational Qualifications Scheme (NVQ). Further, in several countries, there are demands from employers for a predictable and consistent set of attributes from university graduates, irrespective of institution : the so-called "graduateness" movement that calls for accepted "standards" at national or/and European level.
	This issue may generate one of the central areas of debate over the next decade : whether there should be a national higher education curriculum; what is should comprise for each subject; who should decide; and what are the implications respectively for public accountability; institutional autonomy; and market related university education. The debate may well go beyond national governments to the European level, as is becoming evident in part with the discussion over the harmonisation of professional qualifications. Whilst competencies and credit equivalents are creative instruments, global straightjackets could well be perceived as negative denials of academic freedom and, in themselves, could well inhibit the flexibility of approach being sought.
7.	Many universities have taken the first basic steps towards modularisation/ unitisation/creditisation of the curriculum, in varying degrees of sophistication in terms of credit tariffs; a supporting or dominating regulatory framework; and the recasting of university power structures. The motivations are many and complex. Opening up university courses for access purposes and interrupted study (Dublin City, Dresden) needs technical instruments : this is one. Encouraging student choice — both in terms of Combined Studies/double majors, and more eclectic combinations across the disciplines (Sheffield Hallam, Pau) needs a coherent framework, as does the facilitation of credit for work-related activities or study - the so called accreditation of Prior Experience/Learning (APL/APEL) (Copenhagen Business School).
	Assisting student interchange and mobility especially across international boundaries (dissemination in EU countries of ECTS) and within regional networks (Dublin City, Catania) is greatly facilitated by consistent scheduling and tariff mechanisms. Finally, the facilitation of interrupted study, in response to changes in personal circumstances or career patterns (Cluj, Catalunya, Basel, Heerlen, Sheffield Hallam) requires a systematic, explicit and just means of credit recognition, attribution and accumulation. This could, of course, conflict with the declared aim of reducing the length of the study period for a degree, often in response to national pressure (Cluj, Helsinki).
	"Modularisation" also appears to be linked instrumentally to semesterisation as a scheduling facilitator - by the linking of common timetabling dates to credit based arrangements.
	However, as several cases observe, whilst modularisation and semesterisation offer limitless possibilities, it will be a challenge for the next generation to realise these possibilities in a manner which is creative, flexible and low-cost without sacrificing the entrepreneurial motivation on the altar of bureaucratic regulation.
8.	The university cases seized on the implied distinction in the title between teaching and learning, the former being a teacher driven process, and the latter, a student driven process. For some traditionalists, there is but a marginal difference — the substitution of seminars for lectures. For the majority, the challenge is profound, encompassing inter alia a rethink of the effectiveness of student learning processes and the disposition of the factors which determine it; an assessment of its productivity in resource terms; an assessment of the potential of modularisation and information technology; and carefully evaluated pilot experiments
	Particular emphasis is being laid on teleteaching, IT and electronic communication as a means of responding to the massification problems through high quality imaginative approaches which will be relevant to relatively conventional universities, as well as those with a distance learning orientation (Heerlen). Dimensions of the approaches developed include the use of Internet (Catalunya) both for accessing international learning sources and exporting one’s own programmes on Website pages (Copenhagen Business School, Heerlen); mixed mode learning; interactive learning through electronically stored multi-media data bases (Heerlen); integrated systems for the development, production and delivery of learning (Heerlen’s Mercator System) which consists of a content model of the domain; a device for defining user characteristics; a model for embedded support; and a device for defining the steps in the learning path; and the Virtual University (Copenhagen Business School).
	It is widely conceded that these developments are in their infancy, and that, (apart from the specialised universities), institutional support is weak (Catania); there is a very significant need for training of staff in new techniques (Dublin City, Catalunya, Dresden) and students in new learning skills (Helsinki); and that the technology is not yet available on the ground to exploit these possibilities fully (University College of South Stockholm). In short, technological development is probably proceeding faster than the ability of university staff in general, to keep pace.
9.	Reference has frequently been made in the preceding paragraphs to stakeholders' involvement in teaching and learning. The case evidence indicates a patchy situation both in terms of present activity and further possibilities. On the one hand, there is widespread recognition and rhetoric of stakeholder (industrial, public) involvement as university partners in regional development. However, few universities admit of systematic stakeholder involvement in course design, or the giving of strategic advice on programme developments (Crete, Pau, Porto, Sheffield Hallam, Copenhagen Business School, Dresden and Catalunya being exceptions). The evidence from these perhaps holds the best clues to developments over the next decade.
	There are a whole range of developing instruments in this domain, which at their best, are underpinned by well designed stable alliances between universities, companies, regional and city governments in strategically conceived programmes of regional development. The instruments themselves include in-company education programmes — under and postgraduate; APL/APEL and competency based education (see para. 7 of this Chapter); university degrees with a range of in-company components; company involvement in course design, course review and student assessment; and the international networking between leading universities in co-operation with multi-national companies in provision of international programmes.
	It is worth reflecting that companies may well be interested in the total spectrum of programmes from sub-degree to Ph.D. from one favoured provider. This obviously raises questions about the willingness of universities to get involved in sub-degree work, and to espouse this range themselves or to initiate a consortium including non-university institutions for this purpose (Dublin City). This reinforces the earlier point about the blurring of the distinction between university and non-university education, and the issues presented for determining the mission of a particular university. For state agencies, this also raises profound questions about the character of a higher education system, its scope, and for institutional financing.
10.	The international dimension of universities in the 21st Century was analysed in paras. 12-14 of Chapter 1, and case evidence indicates a strong international motivation in the teaching/learning domain. There is now a great deal of institutional experience here. Of general acceptance are the increasing sophistication of student mobility programmes (although various confess to a "deficit of trade" in this regard); extensive credit recognition through ECTS and various bilateral devices; periods abroad spent in company internships as part of degree programmes; and international curricula, including an extension of area/regional studies (Cluj). More disputation seems evident over the question of obligatory language study as part of degree programmes as a "transferable skill". With concerns about the ascendancy of English as the most common language; the effect of this on attracting students to countries whom language is more marginal to the European mainstream; and the dilemmas posed for distance learning/electronic media by the language issue (Heerlen), it is clear what the forthcoming agenda issues are here. One of the exciting possibilities is that of networked curricula through electronic means, which in itself raises interesting issues of intellectual property, student recruitment, accreditation, and staff competencies.
	At present, the institutional implementation of international strategies in the cases may be viewed along two dimensions. The first is a spectrum from internationalism as being of marginal significance, to internationalism as being all pervasive in institutional life. The second spectrum is from a very ad hoc implementation with little systematisation, to a robustly systematic institutionalisation through carefully conceived processes, structures and policies. It may be reasonably contended that the next decade will witness the movement of most institutions to the highly systematic and all pervasive ends of the two-spectra - which is easier said than done but undoubtedly necessary.
11.	Quality assurance has been one of the major growth industries within European HE in recent years, and it would have been surprising to note any omissions in this regard. Across the cases therefore, one perceives, first, the normal expressions of institutional level evaluation — student reviews; peer reviews; self assessment programmes etc. and, second, system driven evaluation via government agencies, rectors’ conferences etc. Both of which may well incorporate international experts. The challenges in the Quality domain emerging from the cases are difficult. The first is to determine whether institutional accreditation on the US model has a place in the European scene, and if so, what should be its characteristics, and should it be nationally or EU based (Erciyes). Second, much Quality evaluation within institutions is rightly based on the faculty level (Helsinki). How the university should corporately monitor this, especially to ensure that it leads to genuine and lasting change and organisational improvement (Catania), or to a "learning organisation" (Copenhagen Business School) is an interesting issue. Much evaluation activity, however, is felt to be time consuming and leading to nowhere in particular. Finally, given what has been said about stakeholder involvement, there is the question of how stakeholders should contribute to Quality review?
	Quality review mechanisms may be classified on a matrix where one dimension is whether the stimulus is internal or external to the institution; and the other is whether the processes are supportive or evaluative. It is quite evident that institutions thoroughly espouse the notion of quality assurance, at a strategic level, which is not to say that it is widely loved or even respected within institutions. This is partly due to academic insularity; partly due to the ascendancy of punitive, control-oriented systems in some places; and partly because little seems to happen as a consequence. There is a place for internal and external foci as well as for supportive and evaluative styles. The challenge of the next decade will be to try to evolve a coherent and effective framework which achieves progress on all aspects.
12.	Finally, it is quite clear from the above that the future development of teaching and learning, whilst exciting, will be threatening to many, and risky, in two senses. First, higher education systems and international systems are increasingly competitive, and second, institutions may be entering two unknown domains simultaneously — new clientele and new forms of teaching and learning provision or service.
	Risk management is not something in which most leaders of European universities have been experienced exponents, given the nature of the settings in which most of them have operated. There are clearly from the above paragraphs, complex decisions on directions and investment which will need to be made, which, after all, represent the natural corollary of increased self determination. Wrong decisions on either dimension could clearly have disastrous institutional consequences over the long term.
	This raises questions about the organisational capacity of higher education institutions, both in terms of the educational and managerial dimensions of that phrase. Even if the directions are right, we are left with questions such as the following. What is the extent to which traditional academic administration can cope with a diverse student population with diverse needs and learning patterns (Sheffield Hallam)? How willing is the collegium to admit external stakeholders to be full partners in curriculum design and renewal (Porto, Debrecen)? Is the university capable of meeting the huge resource implications of IT — based learning, both at the university level (Sheffield Hallam) and at faculty level (Helsinki)? How adequate is staff willingness and competency in terms of e.g. excellence in international education; new and multiple learning methods, and industrial relevance (Pau, Porto, Copenhagen Business School, Sheffield Hallam)? What is needed to sustain purposive staff development, e.g. a Teaching and Learning Institute (Sheffield Hallam) or a Dean (Dublin City)? Is the staff age profile conducive to the challenges which lie ahead? How does the university stand in terms of the creation and sustainability of a genuine environment of experimentation, organisational learning and the admission of mistakes, in the mission to create openness and ownership of the development process (Copenhagen Business School)? Has the university the capacity to overcome the boundaries imposed by disciplinary divisions (intellectual and organisational) (Catania, Helsinki); to collaborate in an ostensibly competitive world; and the ability to design ground rules to further such a vision?
	These are formidable questions to which we will return.