Chapter 11.3
ICT and Educational Policy in the European Region
Claudio Delrio
Claudio Dondi
Scienter
Bologna, Italy
Abstract:“Variable geometry” is often associated with the discourse about Europe, given the many differences among countries. For many countries, ICT infrastructure and utilization (e-readiness) are among the highest in the world, yet other countries have much lower e-readiness levels. The rationale of ICT educational policies in Europe is definitely related to the transition towards the knowledge society. Policies are evolving to an approach in which ICT per se is losing emphasis in favour of the benefits that ICT can offer to the pressing needs of society and economy. This means also that there are policy developments in education enabled by ICT that are not classified as “ICT-related,” but instead are focused on innovative approaches to teaching and learning. The evolution in terminology and focus as seen in European Union (EU) documents and programmes shows this development. However, challenges for ICT-related educational policies in Europe still remain.
Keywords:E-readiness, European Union initiatives, Integration, Knowledge Society, Visions and values; IT Policy, Europe
11.3.1 Socio-Economic, Educational and Cultural Context
Europe, as every other region of the world, is affecting -and it is affected by-worldwide social, political and economic trends such as globalisation (or the end of nation-states), the rise of the knowledge economy and society, the diversification of life and learning trajectories, changing skills and competences at work (Institute for Prospective Technological Studies [IPTS], 2005), and the ICT revolution(Leonie Consortium, 2005). However, there are some specific “European” trends that affect most of the continent. One could argue, despite national differences, that Europe is an “aging continent”. This implies also potential shortfalls in the size and capacity of the workforce. Changes in the age structure of the population will affect every category of public spending to some degree. Three areas of public spending are particularly sensitive to demographic shifts: income security, health care, and education. Therefore, pressure for reform on current education and training institutions as well as on the current European welfare systems is definitely a hot topic in the agenda of all European policy makers. Moreover, one could argue that some of the worldwide trends mentioned above have a European connotation. For instance the globalisation or internationalisation process in Europe cannot be separated by the process of European integration.
The European Union (EU) is redefining how Europe is viewed by others and how Europe views itself. Economies are becoming tied together through the creation of a “common market” with the same rules and regulations. Having said that, there is no doubt about the fact that Europe is featured by very significant diversities. Europe is home to unity and dissent, prosperity and poverty, harsh climates and idyllic resorts. Despite the unifying effects of the EU, some areas of Europe continue to become more splintered as people’s war over lands and ideas. Yugoslavia has already split into five separate countries and tensions continue in Serbia-Montenegro. Tensions remain high in the Basque region straddling the Spain/France border. Northern Ireland has been a hotbed of dissent and violence. Flemish and Walloon peoples in Belgium continue to have tense relationships. Wales and Scotland continue the debate of the value of sovereignty apart from England.
It has been suggested that Europe is divided into four major regions based on environmental, cultural, and economic similarities (United Nations Statistic Division, 2006). Eastern Europe consists of the Belarus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Poland, Russian Federation,Slovak Republic, and Ukraine. Eastern Europe also contains Balkan Europe, which includes the countries of Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Romania, Slovenia, and Serbia-Montenegro. Western Europe, the industrial heartland of Europe, consists of Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, the Republic of Ireland, and the United Kingdom. Also included in Western Europe is Alpine Europe: Austria and Switzerland. Northern Europe includes Denmark, Finland, Greenland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. Southern Europe, sometimes called Mediterranean Europe, consists of Cyprus, Greece, Italy, Malta, Portugal, and Spain.
However, there are several other cleavages that do not mirror this rough differentiation. One could mention, for instance the differentiation between countries belonging or not to the Euro-zone, (comprising at the moment 12 member states of the European Union), or the subscribers of the Schengen treaty (Wikipedia, n.d.), Schengen treaty) of free movement of people (comprising some members of the European Union and some non members such as Norway) or could refer to different welfare systems, varying educational systems and so on. “Variable geometry” is often associated with the discourse about Europe.
This is reflected also in the field of e-learning policies, and before this, ICT-in-education policies (it should be noted that in Europe the terms e-learning, eLearning, and e-Learning are used interchangeably). The chapter focuses mainly on the ICT-in-education policy of countries within the European Union and the ICT-in –education policy of the EU itself. It is difficult to formulate remarks that apply to the whole of Europe as, first of all, there are definitely different starting points in Europe, with several European countries having national policies about ICT in education in the early 1980s. Focusing on the current situation, there are still considerable differences in the overall "e-readiness" of countries.Table 1 provides an overview of the prevalence of ICT across Europe. It demonstrates that different baseline levels of ICT infrastructure are still significant.
Table 11-3-1
E-readiness ranking, selected European countries (The Economist Intelligence Unit, 2006)
2006 rank in region / 2005 rank in region / Country / Overall ranking (of 68) / E-readiness score (out of 10)1 / 1 / Denmark / 1 / 9.00
2 / 3 / Switzerland / 3 / 8.81
3 / 2 / Sweden / 4 / 8.74
4 / 4 / UK / 5 / 8.64
5 / 6 / Netherlands / 6 / 8.60
6 / 5 / Finland / 7 / 8.55
7 / 7 / Norway / 11 / 8.35
8 / 8 / Germany / 12 / 8.34
9 / 9 / Austria / 14 (tie) / 8.19
10 / 10 / Ireland / 16 / 8.09
11 / 11 / Belgium / 17 / 7.99
12 / 12 / France / 19 / 7.86
13 / 13 / Spain / 24 / 7.34
14 / 14 / Italy / 25 / 7.14
15 / 15 / Portugal / 26 / 7.07
16 / 16 / Greece / 29 / 6.42
Different levels of ICT infrastructure and use are confirmed also by other research. According to the L-Change yearly report (L-Change Consortium, 2003) there are significant disparities in Europe with regard to the enabling contextual factors. Not only the baseline levels of ICT infrastructure are diverging, but also the arrival points, e.g. the implementation results of e-learning policies in Europe, are varying. It is difficult to identify mechanistic patterns. One may argue that a higher level of e-readiness might multiply the impact of e-learning policies, but on the other hand it might also lower the level of attention and the related resources of these policies in the agenda. The lack of new targeted ICT programmes in Denmark can be an example of this argument.
Moreover, positive contextual factors might be influencing policies and also the other way round. Another level of complexity is related to the actors involved in these policies. “In some countries, such as the United Kingdom and France the state has a key role in setting standards and attainment targets shall be lifted through the use of ICT.Other countries (the Netherlands and Nordic countries) follow the approach of setting the overall goals and targets, but leaving more freedom and autonomy for schools” (Blamire, R., & Balanskat, A. (2002).
The aim of the following sections in this chapter is therefore to provide an overview of ICT-related educational policies in Europe taking into account this complexity.First of all, it presents an aggregate picture at European level, illustrating a shift in focus in the main objectives of these policies, from the initial techno-enthusiasm to the better awareness of the social, organizational, and pedagogic implications in the implementation of e-learning related policies. Main common trends will be underlined, as well as some specific trends taking place in certain countries (or, as it is going to be argued, in certain clusters of countries). A particular emphasis will indeed be placed on the different baseline levels of readiness of different European countries and regions. This will be the main argument of the paragraph dedicated to the implementation matrix in Section 11.3.3 of this chapter. A critical analysis will conclude the chapter, pinpointing the main challenges and obstacles of ICT and education policy in Europe.
11.3.2 Rationales and Influencing Factors for a Policy about ICT in Education
Before providing an overview of ICT educational policies in Europe, there is a need to clarify what is meant by ICT educational policy. According to the definition provided by Kozma, ICT educational policy is “a rationale, a set of goals, and a vision for how education systems might be with the introduction of ICT and how students, teachers, parents, and the general population might benefit from its use in schools” (Kozma, 2008, p.xxx).
The rationale of ICT educational policies in Europe is definitely related to the transition towards the knowledge society (Anderson, 2008). As pinpointed by many observers, knowledge is the main vector of evolution of western societies and this has profound implications for ICT educational policies. The key role of education in the knowledge society has led to the sector enjoying the lively interest of policymakers in Europe and elsewhere.
At a conference of the European Council (of government leaders and leaders of state) in March 2000 in Lisbon the participants established the following strategic objective for the European Union for the immediate future: “to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion”(page 2 Presidency Conclusions-Lisbon European Council, 2000). Strategic objectives for education were subsequently proposed by the European education ministers and adopted by the European Council. Among these objectives, further specified in Barcelona in 2002, the importance of integrating ICT in modern education and training systems was emphasized in view of enhancing the quality, access, and openness of European education and training systems.
In relation to the Lisbon strategic objectives, the European Commission has formulated the eLearning Initiative (European Commission, 2000) followed by the eLearning Action Plan (2001-2004)(European Commission, 2001), which sets out the need for new approaches to education and training and continued development of quality multimedia contents and service. At that time, many European countries had started to develop an e-learning strategy or already had an established strategy for ICT in education(eWatch Consortium, 2002), also in the framework of e-Europe (European Commission, 2002).
For instance in Germany, in 2000, the Federal Ministry for Education and Research (Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung [BMBF] launched the initiative “New Media in Education”, targeting schools, universities, and vocational training (Federal Ministry for Education and Research in Germany, 2000) with the objectives to develop infrastructure, content and competences. The Italian Action Plan for the Information Technology Society (2001-2003) had similar objectives, including an emphasis on renewing school organisation and management and fostering pedagogical innovation. (Ministry for Technological Innovation, 2001). The Finnish strategy “Education, Training and Research in the Information Society, the National strategy for 2000 – 2004” (European Schoolnet, 2004) also shared these goals but also included a reference to virtual schools and virtual universities. In the UK, the Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) launched three major programmes aimed at further exploiting ICT in education, as part of the overall strategy for Lifelong Learning and developing the UK into a Learning Society. These were the National Grid for Learning (NGfL), the University for Industry (UfI) and the UKeU (Uk e-University).
In several countries dedicated departments within the Ministry of Education or dedicated governmental agencies, such as the National Centre for Technology in Education (NCTE) in Ireland, were established ( in many cases building upon earlier agencies or centres for ICT in education.
Despite different formulations and some national specificities, a pattern can be identified in these policy statements. A key word in the “first-generation” policy statements was certainly “integration”, especially in terms of growing convergence among European countries in view of the Lisbon process, based on the “open method of coordination”. However, despite these attempts of integration, the focus of the “early days” strategies, including those of several European countries in the 1980s, was to a great extent on infrastructure development. For instance the L-change research on indicators of e-learning development (L-Change Consortium, 2003) demonstrates that the attention of policy makers and e-learning stakeholders has been very much on ICT penetration and infrastructure at the beginning of policy development within many of the nations in the region. The “pupils per computer” rate was typically the main success indicator of early ICT-in-education or e-learning policies. There were claims to tackle other complementary measures such as e-skills of learners and learning facilitators or content development. However, “in many other EU countries they were either disproportionally smaller in terms of investment, or not synchronised (usually late, but sometimes early) in relation to the availability of technology in schools.” (eWatch Consortium, 2002). Moreover, users’ needs and concerns were generally not systematically identified, analysed, and addressed in these strategies. The failure of the UK e-University (Wikipedia (n.d.), UK e-University) was a paradigmatic example of the lack of a real consideration of users in the mainly top-down policy strategies.
11.3.3 Specific Policies about ICT and Education in the European Union
With specific regards to EU policies, the e-learning initiative has been followed by the eLearning Programme (European Parliament and Council, 2003) for 2004-2006 which is, according to the European Commission, a further step towards realising the vision of technology serving lifelong learning. It focuses on a set of actions in high priority areas, chosen for their strategic relevance to the modernisation of Europe’s education and training systems. The four action lines of the eLearning programme are:
-Promoting digital literacy
-European virtual campuses
-e-Twinningof schools in Europe and promotion of teacher training (
-Transversal actions for the promotion of e-learning in Europe (European Parliament and Council, 2003).
Other EU-funded programmes have financed initiatives aimed at promotingICT for learning.
The Socrates programme has a specific line, Minerva, (European Commission, 2004a) specifically dedicated to open and distance learning, and the educational use of ICT. The vocational training programme Leonardo da Vinci (European Commission, 2004b) supports many projects that make extensive use of ICT for training purposes. The EU's VI Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development is also supporting research on the contribution of information society technologies to innovation in education and training through its Technology Enhanced Learning Strategic Objective (European Commission, 2005).
Many European countries have also a fully deployed policy and a set of initiatives dealing with ICT educational polices (Euser Consortium, 2004; Gerhard, & Balanskat, 2006). A shift in focus can be observed in these “second-generation” policies. Although “It cannot be said that the technology infrastructure and access problem is now solved in Europe”(eWatch consortium, 2002, p. 75) especially in the new member states, the focus nowadays is not any more on infrastructure but on the necessary complementary measure such as teacher training, competence building, content development, and other measures that can ensure real qualitative development. Along these lines, the Finnish Ministry of Education has launched in 2002 a national program called OPE.FI ( in order to improve the ICT skills of the in-service teachers and teaching personnel. The German initiative Bildungswege in der Informationsgesellschaft ( aims to improve the capacity of judgement, to increase sensibilities with respect to value judgments in the use of new media, to develop new forms of teaching, and to help increase the quality of studying and lecturing.
Moreover, policies are evolving to an approach in which “ICT per se is loosing emphasis in favour of the benefits that ICT can offer to the pressing needs of society and economy. Innovation, competitiveness and inclusion become thus main foci of ICT for learning in general.” (IPTS, 2005, p.22). e-Learning is usually addressed – directly or indirectly – within broader policies and initiatives concerning: information society development, e-skills, lifelong learning and continuous training, digital literacy, innovation for growth and competitiveness, and employment strategies. This means also that there might be some developments enabled by ICT that are not any more classified as “ICT-related”. For instance, in Sweden “only just over a third of teachers participate in developments described as related to ICT but over 80 per cent, much more than in any other country, participate in other forms” (OECD, 2004, p.30).
The early-days claims of integration have been refocused in many senses and at different levels e.g.:
-Integration of ICT into learning systems and learning practices
-Integration of ICT educational policies with other policies: (R&D, social inclusion, employment)
-Integration among sectors of learning systems/disciplines enhanced by ICT
-Integration of groups at risk of social exclusion in the Knowledge society
-Integration of the eLearning discourse into the lifelong learning agenda (Helios Consortium, 2006)
Another significant development of ICT-related policies for education concerns the increased availability and dissemination of practices, which actually poses a problem of mainstreaming innovation.
However, the widening of the perspective of ICT educational policies has not corresponded to a higher place on the agenda for these policies. Evidence for reinforcing this argument is the lack of explicit reference to e-learning in several EU-level and national educational policies (ODL Liaison Committee, 2004). For instance, in the proposal for the new integrated European programme for lifelong learning after 2007, the disappearance of a specific action dedicated to e-learning in favour of a generic reference to learning innovation within a transversal action is emblematic.