Internationalization of Higher Education in MENA: Policy Issues Associated with Skills Formation and Mobility. Report No: 63762-MNA. This paper was prepared by a team led by Adriana Jaramillo, Senior Education Specialist at the World Bank, with contributions from Alan Ruby, Senior Fellow, University of Pennsylvania, Fabrice Henard, OECD, and Hafedh Zaafrane. Download the Report. Download the begining of the Report.
7. A Regional Approach to Accreditation
93. A regional approach to accreditation and recognition of qualifications requires a level of consensus on the goals and reference points to be used by the national agencies in charge of quality assessment and evaluation. This should not be approached by assembling all of the standards and indicators in use in the region or by gathering detailed descriptions of the evaluation/accreditation procedures relevant to and applied within each national system. Neither approach offers the necessary analysis of the relevance, utility, applicability, or transferability of standards or processes to different national settings. They fail to provide any information on the links between standards and procedures and the constraints and requirements of the national system. While assembling this information will provide knowledge on what exists, it will not produce an effective regional approach to QA (ENQA, 2005).
94. More progress can be made by identifying the values that underpin commonly accepted notions (like independence, transparency, and peer review) used across MENA countries. At times there will be differences in how these values are prioritized and expressed and these need to be examined systematically and thoughtfully to build mutual understandings and trust among agencies and hence make it easier to accept decisions of other parties about institutional accreditation and degree recognition. There have been some successes using such a process. For instance, QA agencies in Europe have delineated some key principles to shape their work together with an aim of recognizing each other„s accreditation decisions. In summary, these principles are that:
- There will be regional standards for internal and external QA, and for external QA agencies;
- Regional QA agencies will be externally reviewed regularly;
- Regional agencies which meet the agreed standards will be identified in a publicly accessible register; and
- The register will be maintained by agencies acting together to maintain standards.
95. Such a public register assists consumers, employers, and students to identify professional and credible agencies, strengthens procedures for recognizing qualifications, and enhances the public standing and authority of QA agencies.
8. Principles for Accrediting Accreditation Bodies
96. It is easier to build trust between agencies when there are some common standards to assess the authenticity and integrity of an accreditation agency. The U.S. Department of Education has benchmarks to guide its recognition processes of the numerous national, regional, and programmatic accrediting agencies. The following principles, drawn from those benchmarks and from good administrative practice, could be the basis of a MENA framework for recognizing QA or to develop mutual recognition of agencies.
To be successful, an accreditation agency must follow the following core operating principles:
- The agency should be singular in purpose; i.e., involved only in QA and not in the design or delivery of educational programs;
- The agency should have sufficient intellectual and fiscal capacity; i.e., be solvent and appropriately staffed;
- The agency should be separate and independent, not subject to direction or control in accreditation decisions by state funding agencies;
- The agency should be not for profit;
- The agency should be accepted by peer agencies, the academic community, employers, and relevant professionals;
- The agency should encourage public participation and transparency in governance;
- The agency should maintain accurate and open records of accreditation decisions; and
- The agency should be experienced and recognized for its work in the region, discipline, or programs of study.
The status of current quality assurance structures in MENA countries is as follows:
- There are QA agencies in Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Bahrain, Libya, Oman, Palestine, Yemen, Sudan, and the UAE.
- The Arab Network for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ANQAHE) has sixteen member countries, which already have, or are in the process of establishing, a QA agency.
- Most QA agencies are independent or semi-independent, and accredit programs and institutions.
97. QA is an important driver to improve the quality of tertiary education, and QA methods and systems are being revised worldwide to be more efficient in serving students, institutions, and governments. One important trend is the need to measure tertiary learning outcomes in meaningful ways. In addition to serving domestic purposes, recognition of degrees obtained abroad or through foreign institutions operating in the home country is critical to promote student mobility as well as successful return of students who go abroad.
98. To make the most of cross-border tertiary education, international and/or mutual recognition of diplomas is critical, as it can facilitate student mobility and allow students with foreign qualifications to work in their home country or, more generally, in the international labor market. To promote student mobility and recognition both in the home and host country, MENA countries could engage in a regional and a cross-regional dialogue to promote mutual recognition of diplomas, and increase its engagement in the international convergence of QA practices. More information sharing could facilitate the recognition of domestic degrees and the understanding of foreign qualifications in general.
9. Maximizing the Returns from Cross-border Education
99. Overall, cross-border tertiary education can assist developing countries in strengthening their higher education systems and fostering economic development. Cross-border education can expand domestic access to post-secondary education, through outbound student mobility and inbound program and institution mobility. Student and faculty mobility builds international networks, which underpin national innovation and research and development systems. Partnerships between local and foreign universities through program and institution mobility can improve the quality of domestic education services.
100. MENA countries choosing to use cross-border tertiary education to build capacity and complement domestic provision face several policy challenges. To benefit from cross-border education, countries should create a framework that:
- Facilitates participation in cross-border education and co-operation between foreign and domestic tertiary education institutions;
- Sets clear goals and targets for the different forms of internationalization linked with the development needs of the nation;
- Develops sound QA principles and processes to ensure that cross-border education meets the needs of students and is relevant to meet national goals and labor market needs;
- Establishes policies and procedures for ease of movement of students, faculty, and skilled labor, including visa and immigration policies;
- Sets goals for intra-regional student mobility and for student and faculty flows into the region through accreditation, student and faculty exchange, hiring incentives, and research infrastructure, including competitive research grants and a clear policy on the “export of educational services and private investment in higher education”;
- Aligns regional and international agencies to promote mutual recognition of degrees and credit transfer; and
- Fosters innovation and research and development capacity to adapt and respond to a continuously evolving technology-driven environment.
10. A Basis for National and Regional Dialogue
101. The observations, data and examples set out here can be used as a basis for debate, discussion, and analysis with and between MENA nations.
102. Regional cooperation could begin with shared efforts to understand the complex interactions between student mobility, domestic higher education, and the economic and social development priorities of the MENA countries. Topics of mutual interest include a better understanding of student flows and the programs they study in other countries. This would provide some insights into areas of under-provision in the region and assist in labor market forecasting. Joint work on the relative successes of students studying abroad, in the region, in branch campuses, and in national institutions, including measures such as time to first job on graduation and relative earnings, would also have policy relevance, as would cross-national work on longer term destinations of skilled citizens, and the effectiveness of different incentives to return to the home country. An illustrative research agenda is presented in box 3.
103. The outcomes of such work can frame and inform a dialogue between ministries, governments, institutions, and stakeholders about the strategic directions for skill formation and the development of higher education within individual countries. They can promote systematic examination of different scenarios for the creation and application of human capital and provide opportunities for participation in policy formation for a wide range of constituencies. Similar suggestions were made in the World Bank (2009) report on longer term perspectives on labor and job mobility in the MENA region, which recommended a three stage process to assist the smooth integration of the region to the globalized skill market. Those steps would involve improving basic demographic and labor force projections and scenario building around the policy options in education, migration and social protection; and would be open to national governments and intra- and inter-regional cooperation between agencies.
104. The same observations, data, and examples supplemented by the outcomes of national discussions can inform an intra-regional discussion between principals (i.e., ministers, senior officials and institutional leaders) on the opportunities and benefits of regional cooperation on matters of common interest in the area of cross-border education and the mobility of highly skilled people. There are clearly synergies and cost savings from sharing expertise, experience, and development work in areas such as recognition of qualifications, QA, diversification of programs, and the due diligence appropriate for cross-border provision.
Key Topics for Regional Policy Options
- Efforts to develop a regional approach for accreditation and setting up qualifications framework need to be strengthened.
- The above needs to be coupled with a mutual recognition of qualifications between home and host countries.
- Joint research on building better pathways for student and skilled labor mobility will strengthen countries‟ individual capacities.

References
Becker, R. (2009). "International Branch Campuses : Markets and Strategies." Observatory on Borderless Higher Education: London.
Clemens, M. (2009). “Skill Flow: A Fundamental Reconsideration of Skilled-Worker Mobility and Development.” UNDP Research Paper.
Clemens, M. and L. Pritchett. (2008). “Income Per Natural: Measuring Development for People rather than Places.” Population and Development Review 34 (3):395-434.
ENQA. (2005). “Quality Convergence Study: A contribution to the debates on quality and convergence in the European Higher Education Area.” Eds. F. Crozier, B. Curvale, and F. Hénard. Helsinki: ENQA.
EUA. (2010a). “Salamanca convention; the Bologna process and the European Higher Education Area.” Geneva: European Universities Association.
EUA. (2010b). “TRENDS 2010, A decade of change in European Higher Education.” A. Sursock and H. Smidt. Geneva: European Universities Association.
Finn, M.G. (2003). “Stay Rates of Foreign Doctorate Recipients from U.S. Universities, 2001.” Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, URL: www.orau.gov/orise/pubs/stayrate03.pdf. Last Accessed 5 March 2005.
IDP. (2010). “Profile of Middle East Students.” July 30,2010. http://idpusa.blogspot.com.
Iguchi, Y. (2003). “The Movement of the Highly Skilled in Asia.” In Migration and the Labour Market in Asia: Recent Trends and Policies. Paris: OECD.
ILO. (2003). “Skilled Labor Mobility: Review of Issues and Evidence.” In Migration and the Labour Market in Asia: Recent Trends and Policies. Paris: OECD.
Kataoka, S. “University Partnerships.” Unpublished document.
Kandasamy, M. and R. Santhiram. (2000). “From National Interest to Globalization: The Education System of Malaysia.” In K. Mazurek, M.A. Winzer and C. Majorek (eds.). Education in a Global Society: A Comparative Perspective. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Knight, J. (2003). GATS, Trade and Higher Education. Perspective 2003: Where are We? Observatory on Borderless Higher Education, URL: www.obhe.ac.uk/products/reports/publicaccesspdf/May2003.pdf. Last Accessed 7 March 2005.
Knight, J. (2005). “New Typologies for Cross-border Higher Education.” International Higher Education, 38.
Lenn, M. P. (2003). “Strengthening World Bank Support for Quality Assurance and Accreditation in Higher Education in East Asia and the Pacific.” CQAIE Report to the World Bank.
McBurnie, G. and C. Ziguras. (2001). “The Regulation of Transnational Higher Education in Southeast Asia: Case Studies of Hong Kong, Malaysia and Australia.” Higher Education. Vol. 42(1):85-105.
McKenzie, D. and H. Rapoport. (2006). “Can migration reduce educational attainment? Evidence from Mexico.” Policy Research Working Paper 3952. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Myagiwa, K. (1991). Scale Economies in Education and the Brain Drain Problem. International Economic Review, Vol. 32, (3):. 743-759
OBHE. (2011). Perspectives on the Future. Found at www.obhe.org.
OECD. (2004a). Internationalisation and trade in higher education. Opportunities and challenges. Paris: OECD.
OECD. (2004b). Quality and Recognition in Higher Education: the cross-border challenge. Paris: OECD.
OECD. (2004c). Education at a Glance. OECD Indicators 2004. Paris: OECD.
OECD. (2005). Trends in International Migrations. Paris: OECD.
OECD. (2008). “Assessment of learning outcomes in higher education: A comparative review of selected practices.” OECD Education Working Paper No. 15 by D. Nushe. Paris: OECD.
Republic Of Indonesia. (2000). “Decision of the Director General of Higher Education of the Ministry of National Education of the No. 61/Dikti/Kep/2000 Regarding Guidelines for the Implementation of Cooperation Between Higher Education Institutions in Indonesia and Overseas Higher Education Institutions/Other Institutions.” Issued by the Director General of Higher Education of the Ministry of National Education of the Republic of Indonesia.
Sabadie, J.A., J. Avato, U. Bardak, F. Panzica, and N. Popova. (2010). Migration and Skills: The Experience of Migrant Workers from Albania, Egypt, Moldova, and Tunisia. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Singapore, Ministry of Education. (2000). Information Notes: Registration of Distance Learning Programmes. Private Schools Section, Ministry of Education, Singapore.
UK Higher Education International Unit. (2010). International higher education in facts and figures. London: Universities UK.
World Bank. (2009). Shaping the Future: A Long term Perspective of People and Job Mobility in the Middle East and North Africa. Washington, DC: World Bank
World Bank. (2010a). Labor Migration from North Africa, Development, Impact, Challenges and Policy Options. Washington, DC: World Bank.
World Bank. (2010b). The Day After Tomorrow, A Handbook on the Future Economic Policy in the Developing World. Washington, DC: World Bank.
World Bank. (2011). “Outlook for Remittance Flows 2011- 2013.” Migration and Development Brief #16. Washington, DC: World Bank.
World Bank/AFD. (2011, forthcoming). “Seeking Financial Sustainability for Higher Education in MENA.” Washington, DC: World Bank. Download the Report.