Content uploaded by Ulf- Daniel Ehlers
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ulf- Daniel Ehlers on Jul 28, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Future Skills for a
European Higher
Education
Ulf-Daniel Ehlers (2020), Bologna Process Beyond
2020, Bologna, Italy, June 2019
Reference: Proceedings of Bologna Process Beyond 2020 – Fundamental
values of the EHEA, (2019), p. 311 - 324
Correspondence address: Prof. Dr. phil. habil. Ulf-Daniel Ehlers
Duale Hochschule Baden-Württemberg | Baden-Wuerttemberg Cooperative State University
Erzbergerstr. 121, 76133 Karlsruhe
Deutschland | Germany
mail: ehlers@dhbw.de | ulf.ehlers@googlemail.com
skype: ulf.ehlers
web: www.dhbw.de | www.ulf-ehlers.net
PROCEEDINGS
Edited by
Sijbolt Noorda, Peter Scott and Martina Vukasovic
PROCEEDINGS
Edited by
Sijbolt Noorda, Peter Scott and Martina Vukasovic
© 2020 Bononia University Press
Bononia University Press
Via Ugo Foscolo 7 – 40123 Bologna
tel. (+39) 051 232 882
fax (+39) 051 221 019
www.buponline.com
email: info@buponline.com
All rights reserved. No portion of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted in any form or by any means – electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherwise – without the written permission of the publisher.
ISBN: 978-88-6923-493-4
Cover design: Creative Company Srl
Book layout: Design People, Bologna
First edition: June 2020
Technical Partner
Summary
1. Introduction 9
Sijbolt Noorda
2. Full papers – Keynotes
The Greatest Impact of Universities: Educating the Most Vulnerable 15
Maysa Jalbout
Academic freedom in the European Higher Education Area: crisis
or celebration? 21
Liviu Matei
Measuring Academic Freedom Across the World: Insights from
a New Exploratory Project 27
Janika Spannagel
Liberal Arts Education, Student-Centred Learning and the Art
Teun J. Dekker
Successful Design of Student-Centred Learning and Teaching (SCLT)
Ecosystems in the European Higher Education Area 41
Education for sustainable development as a catalyst and the role
of students in the future management of HEIs 61
Valentina Tafuni, Janek Heß
Three Theses on the Social Dimensions of Higher Education 67
Chris Brink
4
Bologna and the Social Dimension – Lost in Translation? 75
John Storan
The Bologna Process and the demands of the Labour Market 81
Agneta Bladh
How can education contribute to socioeconomic development?
Rethinking Human Capital for the Labour Market of the future 85
Yaroslav Kuzminov, Pavel Sorokin, Isak Froumin
3. Full papers – Authors
Session I
Bologna at 20: looking back but mainly forward 95
Sjur Bergan
Twenty years of Higher Education system reform. An international
comparison 99
Kurt De Wit, Bruno Broucker
the unexpected “core added values” 107
Debora Di Rocco
Can the principle of co-management allow to involve students to
Paolo Mancarella, Michela Passalacqua
The Bologna Process and Education Reform in Slovakia 119
Marek Smid
Session II
Innovative team-teaching for physics: educating the next generation 125
Johannes Albrecht et al.
Promoting student-centred forms of learning across an entire
Marian D. Ilie et al.
5
Matteo Fabbri
Stefan Gies
Student-centered learning as a part of incorporating students in
improving the process of education at universities 149
Challenges of Student-Centered Learning from the Students’ Perspective 151
Gohar Hovhannisyan, Aleksandar Šušnjar
Can “Student-centered learning” become a key element in the SEE
Kiemen Cic, p.41 - EHEA’s Global Policy Dialogue? 159
Ann Katherine Isaacs
Student-centred learning: Approaching SCL through the power
differential, professional development framework and student
partnership 165
Karolyn McDonnell
Student-Centered learning in Higher Education in Kosovo 171
Albert Paçarizi
Promoting a curriculum focused on the affective dimension of
learning in medical education 177
Valentina Colonnello, Katia Mattarozzi, Paolo Maria Russo
Snabekova Marita, Seisenbieva Elenora
Binational Good Practice: Implementation of SCL and its
requirements on individual assistance 191
Phillip Stöcks
Creating Impactful Student Associations 195
Will Stringer, Micole Cochrane
“Soka University”: a case-study of a higher education system based
on value-creation 201
Andrew Valenti
Session III
Implementing the Sustainable Development Objectives through the
strategic development cycle – UTAD’s approach and practices 207
Artur Cristóvão, Amadeu Borges, Cristiana Rego
Alice Andrea Mariot
NUI Galway sustainability strategy 2017-2020 Learn – Live – Lead 219
M. O’Dowd Lohan et al.
Global Engagement in Higher Education Institutions: The UN
Sustainable Development Goals as a frame of reference for a broader
internationalisation strategy 225
Lies Verstraete, Tine Ternest
Session IV
Andrea Bernhard
The University of Göttingen’s inclusive and transformative diversity
Andrea Dorothea Bührmann
Diverse communities of learners: The journey of second-generation
Vivian Carstensen, Roland Happ, Olga Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia
Alma Mater and the social dimension of higher education: the case
of EDUACTIVE 251
Pietro Fochi, Ena Peeva, Alberto Pellicanò
University must be saved! Digital Automation in Educational Field 259
Patrizia Moschella
the Bologna Digital Initiative 265
Florian Rampelt, Dominic Orr, Alexander Knoth
Universities and meeting societal needs: two examples of best practice 271
María Elena Sánchez Jordán
6
7
Strengthening the Social Dimension of Higher Education: Lessons
from Scotland 277
Peter Scott, Stephanie McKendry
Could We Create a European Framework for Community
Engagement in Higher Education? 285
Ninoslav Scukanec Schmidt, Thomas Farnell
Introducing a European Education Income for a cross-class
Higher Education 291
Cristina Specchi
Session V
Language service provision in the 21st century: challenges,
opportunities and educational perspectives for translation studies 297
Silvia Bernardini et al.
Creativity: the Necessary Skill for Wellbeing in the Future Cyber-
Giovanni Emanuele Corazza
Ulf-Daniel Ehlers
Key words in education for the labour market of the future:
Chiara Finocchietti
How does higher education foster active citizenship? Qualities of
Kai Mühleck, Stefanie Oelker
Supportive working environment as key in Bologna beyond 2020 –
Jorunn Dahl Norgård, Jon Wikene Iddeng
4. Rapporteurs
Report from session 1 - Academic and related civic values in
Helmi Andersson
Borna Nemet
Brieuc Delanghe
Report from session 5 - Careers and Skills for the Labour
Maciej Rewucki
8
9
Introduction
On June 24, 2019 Bologna saw the festive celebration of the 20th anniversary of
the Bologna Declaration, which in 1999 was signed by education ministers of 29
European countries. is marked the beginning of the so-called Bologna Process,
creating the European Higher Education Area (EHEA), which by now encompasses
48 countries.
ere was every reason to celebrate this great initiative and the movement it started;
even more so as it is hard to imagine that such an initiative would be taken and as widely
followed today, under the present international conditions. Hence the European Higher
Education Area is a precious legacy, to be cherished and honoured, an accomplishment
of the past as well as a promise for the future; which nely characterizes what higher
education itself should be and should do.
On the next day the University of Bologna, in cooperation with Magna Charta
Observatory and the European University Association, hosted an academic conference,
to identify important future challenges for universities and their role in society. e
conference, which drew over a thousand participants from over seventy countries, was
intended as an analytical as well as an agenda-setting contribution to the design of the
Bologna Process in the decades to come. e proceedings of this meeting would then be
presented to the 2020 EHEA Ministerial Meeting in Rome.
e idea behind designing and organizing this academic conference was that for all
the important work of the ministers of the EHEA countries, their sta and the Bologna
Follow-Up Group it would be meaningful to invite teachers, researchers and students to
contribute to thinking ahead about the future of the EHEA and make suggestions for
its dimensions and directions. At the end of the day it is the classrooms that decide what
will be the genuine take-away of new generations of students and what bearing they will
have on the development of society. In my days as president of a university I used to say
that a university without students is as a bike without wheels: a sorry sight. e same
could be said about ne declarations on Higher Education ideals that nd no base or
response in the classroom.
e organizers had identied ve clusters of themes that seemed to be particularly
relevant. ey are a subset of one overarching theme: in what way can universities be
trustworthy communities of teaching and learning for a sustainable future for all citizens of
our very diverse societies?
Speaking on this theme Maysa Jalbout advocated that closing the educational gap
by educating the most vulnerable and truly opening up Higher Education for all who
need it regardless of status or nancial means should be the top priority in the decades
to come, for ministers as well as for universities and teachers.
Introduction
10
In addition to this keynote the present publication contains all keynotes of invited
speakers on all ve themes. After that come selected contributed papers on these themes,
some of which were already presented at the conference. In conclusion this volume in-
cludes reports of ve roundtable sessions composed by the students that organized these
sessions.
e rst of these was on Academic Values. Autonomy, academic freedom, equity
and integrity have entered common usage in recent decades. ey are considered to be
among the core values of academia and crucial conditions for trust and reliability. Yet
making declarations about such principles of good practice isn’t the same as actually
embracing and practicing them. Clientelism, commodication, competitiveness, cor-
ruption are only a few among the many deviations from good and fair practice. How
to combat these aberrations, how to build strong communities of good practice and
how to monitor living or cheating academic values in the EHEA – these are the types
of questions that should be addressed. Speakers and discussants stressed the need to bet-
ter dene, monitor and protect academic freedom, in the interest of the free pursuit of
knowledge as well as the practice of open, respectful dialogue. At the end of day univer-
sities are and should be learning and exercising elds for democratic culture in society.
e second session addressed Student-Centred Learning, a concept often used but
still imperfectly put in practice in many places.
Students are the primary raison d’être of any university. eir successful knowledge
and skills acquisition and their subsequent graduate careers are what universities are for.
So it comes as no surprise that student-centred learning has become a standard phrase
in curriculum design, in quality assurance as well as in educational policies. At the same
time mass enrolment, standardized performance measuring and classroom tradition-
alism are anything but promoting student agency, individual sense of ownership and
freedom of choice.
At the conference a number of colleagues have presented inspiring cases of good
practice and successful innovations, at the same time urging Bologna Process partners to
re-kindle the re of student-centred learning. As one of the speakers put it, learning to
cultivate your own agency and make reective judgments is a crucial educational asset
and a top skill with enduring value throughout graduate careers.
‘Providing Leadership for Sustainable Development, the Role of Higher Education’
was the title of the third session.
e Sustainable Development Goals are set by the United Nations to achieve a more
sustainable future for all. ey each are specic and interconnected at the same time.
It is crystal clear that working towards these goals requires skilled people and the right
kind of policies, innovative solutions and constructive collaborations on many elds.
Interdisciplinary teaching, learning and research at universities have a key role to play.
For the EHEA this goal setting requires a deep rethinking of traditional education and
the design of innovative research projects and programs.
At this session speakers and discussants – among them a good number of students
– contributed by giving powerful impulses, sharing good practices and attractive in-
Introduction
11
centives to academia. If Higher Education and Research systems in the EHEA would
embrace their leadership responsibilities for sustainable development in a strategic and
eective manner, they would be serving their societies well.
e fourth session was about the Social Dimension of Higher Education.
Universities do not exist for themselves or for members of their academic communi-
ties in the rst place. eir role and use for society. is poses a catalogue of challenges.
If society is to benet, how can this best be done? If society is to benet, which society
are we talking about? How can existing inequalities of Higher Education and Research
in terms of access and outreach be smoothened? How could academia avoid elitism and
become a diverse community itself? As super-diversity is a characteristic of many societ-
ies in our time, it is a true challenge for universities to truly reect and embrace this
trait. Is HE ready to move beyond indicators of productivity in research and teaching
and integrate scientic excellence with social responsibility?
One of the keynote speakers answered this last question by presenting and defending
the thesis that excellence clearly is not enough. Universities may like to focus on what
they are good at, they should put more weight on what they are good for, what their role
and purpose in society must be.
‘Careers and Skills for the Labour Market of the future’ was the subject of the fth
session of the conference.
ere is already a long tradition of skills and competences-oriented education to re-
spond to the assumed demands of a developing labour market. is has been a welcome
addition and correction to a knowledge base driven curriculum.
It seems, however, that additional adjustments are needed. Skills and competences
have usually been dened in terms of a changing world of technological innovation,
business reinventions and global connectivity. Isn’t another look at the labour market of
the future needed, one that includes social innovation, local relevance and community
development? Our societal developments require profound and agile skills in teachers,
local leadership professions and competences for community build-up.
In a wider perspective one of the keynote speakers stated that while a good match
between education and labour markets is crucial, it isn’t always easy to make this match;
either because of traditional, out-of-touch education or because of underdeveloped la-
bour markets. It is particularly challenging to design curricula and set goals in terms of
skills and competences that intend to be future-oriented when at the same time employ-
ability is still dened in traditional ways and by established preferences.
is and much more can be found in the following pages.
In conclusion, it gives me great pleasure to thank all those who have contributed to
the success of the Bologna Conference, its organization as well as its deliberations. e
organizers were especially pleased with a high number of student participants and the
many academic colleagues who are no regulars at EHEA meetings.
In addition, I would like to thank Federico Cinquepalmi, David Crosier,
Giacomo Di Federico, Eva Egron-Polak, ESU, Liviu Matei, Alessandra Scagliarini,
Peter Scott, Martina Vukasovic and Lesley Wilson for their invaluable help at the
Introduction
12
assessment of the many abstracts that were submitted. Special thanks to Martina
Vukasovic and Peter Scott for sharing with me the task of editing the contributions
to the present volume.
Last but not least, I would like to acknowledge the generous support of the Italian
Ministry for Universities and Research and of the University of Bologna, highlighting
the role of Rector Francesco Ubertini. Without his energetic leadership none of this
would have happened.
Sijbolt Noorda
Chair Magna Charta Observatory Council
311
Future Skills for a European Higher Education
Ulf-Daniel Ehlers
European Association for Institutes of Higher Education, Brussels, Belgium
Baden-Wurttemberg Cooperative State University, Germany
Corrisponding author: ulf-daniel.ehlers@dhbw-karlsruhe.de
Abstract:
Research on future skills is the current hot topic of the day in management and organizational research.
In times of global networked organizations, and steadily accelerating product cycles, the model of
shifts are likely to play out differently across different industries and regions, globally, our respondents
expect average skills stability – the proportion of core skills required to perform a job that will remain
Are we already having adequate concepts for competence development in higher education? Or is
something new, something radical needed?
Keywords: Competence; Delphi Survey; Education Research; Future Skills; Higher education; Learning.
1. Introduction to the Field of Future Skill Research
Research on future skills is the current hot topic of the day in management and organi-
zational research. In times of global networked organizations, and steadily accelerating
product cycles, the model of qualication for future jobs seems in question. e vast
majority of employers surveyed for the “Future of Jobs Report” of the World Economic
Forum (WEF, 2018), released in 2018, expects that in short term, by 2022, the skills
required to perform most jobs will have shifted signicantly: “While these skill shifts are
likely to play out dierently across dierent industries and regions, globally, our respon-
dents expect average skills stability ‒ the proportion of core skills required to perform a
job that will remain the same ‒ to be about 58%, meaning an average shift of 42% in
required workforce skills over the 2018-2022 period”. Can graduates really be prepared
for the future through knowledge acquisition? Are we already having adequate concepts
for competence development in higher education? Or is something new, something
radical needed? Research on future skills becomes more prominent, either compiling
lists of skills for broad purposes of how to live and work in 2030 (OECD, 2018) or
analyzing job eld related qualications (Deming, 2017). However, the time is ripe to
go a step further and conduct in-depth research.
Ulf-Daniel Ehlers
312
What plays out in the future depends on decisions taken today, which can critically
narrow the room for maneuver over time. at is why it is important to factoring the
long term into decision-making in higher education today. Starting point for research
on future skills is an analysis of factors, which inuence our lives, the way we work and
live, learn and develop. On the one hand, we cannot predict what the future will look
like, whereas, on the other hand we notice that changes are underway and leave us with
a changed environment demanding dierent behavior, and adaption to more complex
situations in our lives and work contexts. An analysis of such changing factors is avail-
able in a multitude of volumes, in many forms, shapes and perspectives. e nature of
such descriptions, studies and analyses is – as they are dealing with the future – natu-
rally carrying a certain degree of vagueness, while being as precise as possible in order
to capture aspects, which can be taken as factors of inuence for the future: future ways
of living, future ways of work, future ways of learning, etc. (e.g. OECD, 2019, 2018,
2017a, 2017b). Analyzing the currently existing writings dealing with the question of
which skills and abilities will be important for the future work life, at least two converg-
ing primary factors crystallize:
• Ever faster technological advancements and their penetration and infusion of all
spheres of our lives, work and societies, leading to an excess of information and
options. is can be compared to the point in time, when Gutenberg invented the
printing machine for books, and for which our society is only starting to develop
ways of coping with it.
• Increased global cooperation, exchange, and communication, which moves from
being an option to being a necessary ingredient of every process of society, work
and individual life.
Resulting from that, a number of connected changes can be observed, which we believe
to be secondary eects, building on the foundations of the two prior ones:
• Resulting from the tectonic shifts in the structure of work and its development,
a new demand for (higher) education study and learning pathways and qualica-
tion structures including certication and credentialing schemes will be needed.
Educational institutions need to understand these forces in order to develop a
changed vision of future education to inform their strategies.
• Fostered through these changes an ever-larger demand for higher educational at-
tainment is induced evoking industrialized societies to turn into learning/educa-
tional societies in which life risks primarily can be mitigated through education.
• And lastly, a changing nature of the very essence of what learning (in school) and
studying (in higher education) is aiming at can be observed, leading to a new
‘lead-orientation’ for concepts like knowledge – shifting from static knowing to
knowing & reection in action in complex and open situations.
It is important to note that no cause-eect model can be applied to these develop-
ments. In order to nd reference models which are capable of capturing the inter-
twined and networked nature of these developments with factors mutually inuenc-
ing each other, we turned to eco-systems theory and cybernetics. e dynamic na-
Future Skills for a European Higher Education
313
ture of these approaches able to deal with and describe system dependencies provides
grounds for theoretical description of reality. e eco-systemic approach is based on
the assumption that changes and developments in one system are causing eects in a
connected system. Building on this approach, combining it with an education science
point of view, as well as with a sociological perspective, our research is rooted in the
assumption that there are ongoing changes within the structure, nature, and prole
of the abilities and skills. Individuals will need these skills for their professional lives
in order to cope with the demands and requirements of their respective work contexts
and tasks. In our research we found, that these changing skill requirements can be
described and analyzed.
Notably, policy and especially research, pays increasing attention to analyzing in-
depth changes and trends for the future world of work and for future job markets
(OECD, 2018a, 2018b; WEF, 2018; Playfoot & Hall, 2009). However, most approach-
es fall short of two perspectives, which we call the “iceberg phenomenon” and the “fu-
ture education gap”:
e rst blind spot is the iceberg phenomenon: e iceberg phenomenon of future
skill research refers to the fact that future skill research is often focusing on technological
change (WEF, 2018; Hirsch-Kreinsen, 2016; CEDEFOP, 2012; Deloitte, 2018; PwC,
2018; McKinsey & Company, 2018; Balliester & Adam, 2018), which is only one side
of the coin. Our research shows that this is just the tip of the iceberg. Only very few
studies try to elicit changes, which go along with it and which lie underneath the surface
of the iceberg: dealing with future work concepts, the tectonic shifts throughout an en-
tire business or public organizations, the way collaboration is organized, and the impact
it has on organization culture, new leadership concepts, more decentralized, smaller
units, and a need to organize shared creativity and shared cognition in a global setting.
e second blind spot (future education gap) is the future skills education con-
cepts gap, which refers to a lack of research with regards to the demand and shape
of future higher education concepts, which meet the need for future skills. It is still
unknown how higher education institutions can organize their academic programs
in a way that they specically are sensitive to supporting the development of future
skills for their future graduates. Although many promising attempts and pilot trials
are underway, there is no overarching forum for discussing possible future higher
education and its institutions.
Both issues, the iceberg phenomenon of future skill research and the future educa-
tion gap are predominant issues in future skill research today. In order to overcome this
shortfall and to be able to research the articulation, extent, nature and contexts of such
future skills – and not limited to digital skills but future skills with a broader scope, we
designed a threefold long-term research project, starting in 2015, called “Future skills
– future learning and future higher education”.1 e research focus is on identifying
1 Notably the rst European country, which had a national higher education strategy mentioning the
Ulf-Daniel Ehlers
314
future skills in a broad and holistic sense, incorporating digital skills but going beyond
them, and determining which changes are caused in work environments leading to these
new skill demands. Moreover, we asked how higher education institutions would have
to reorganize their academic programs in order to support development of such future
skills for future graduates.
ere are complex feedback loops between new technologies, job creation, education
organizations’ attempts to prepare individuals for present and future jobs, and their skill
development. New technologies can drive business growth, job creation, and demand
for specialist skills, but they can also displace entire roles when certain tasks become
obsolete or automated. Well-developed links between higher education institutions and
labor markets in order to share and exchange information about these often short-term
developments, do not exist at large scale.2 Skill gaps ‒ both, among workers and among
the leadership of organizations ‒ can speed up the trends towards automation in some
cases but can also pose barriers to the adoption of new technologies and therefore im-
pede business growth.
Part 1 of the research initiative is about identication of innovative and future,
advanced organizations. We identied organizations, which we call for the purpose
of this research study ‘future organizations’ due to their advanced thinking on learn-
ing and competence development. In part 2 of the research, we analyzed the nature
of these competence concepts and the competence demands of these organizations
on a deep level through in-depth interviews and were able to model a set of sixteen
competence proles which we refer to as ‘future skills’. Each competence prole
contains an array of a number subcompetences. e data led us to be able to identify
a three-dimensional competence frame around the 16 competence proles, so that
they can be categorized according the three future skill dimensions. In order to vali-
date our approach and ndings, and to determine the impact the demand of future
skills has on higher education, we designed – in part 3 – the presented Delphi study
on the basis of our ndings, drawing on the assessments and opinions of almost 50
experts from all over the world.
e Delphi study involves experts into reasoning and evaluation of statements and
scenarios about future higher education. e experts were asked to engage into reec-
tion and evaluation within three areas, which were identied as important for future
higher education: (1) drivers of change shaping future higher education, (2) scenarios of
future higher education, and (3) future skills. For each of the areas we were interested in
the degree of relevance of the respective issues, as well as in the experts’ opinion about
when they would gain relevance.
term “Future Skills” was Ireland (http://hea.ie/assets/uploads/2017/06/National-Strategy-for-Higher-
Education-2030.pdf).
2 Good practices for frameworks of university business cooperation have been analyzed in the frame
of the HAPHE Project (http://haphe.eurashe.eu).
Future Skills for a European Higher Education
315
Methodological Design and Research Context of the Delphi Study
Since 2015, we have been conducting research to shed some light on the future of skill
demand. We focus our eorts on identifying what we (and others) refer to as future
skills, as well as how we can support their development. As has been demonstrated by
other studies, too (Deming, 2017; Noweski, Scheer, Büttner, von ienen, Erdmann,
and Meinel, 2012; OECD, 2017), research in this area is of vital importance as future
graduates need to adapt to an increasingly changing and complexity-gaining environ-
ment that demands agility and innovativeness. To address this complex, intertwined
eld systematically, we pose three questions within three dierent, but interrelated areas:
• Future skills: Which skills are necessary for future employees? Which skills are/
will be necessary to shape the future and society in a sustainable way?
• Future learning concepts: How can organizations and rms support the develop-
ment of future skills (learning and management approaches)?
• Future higher education: How can we design higher education concepts such that
they support the development of future skills?
We approach these questions from an education theoretical point of view, combining
it with a socioecological perspective on competences. Before conducting the Delphi on
which we will elaborate in more detail here, we want to provide a brief overview on two
past projects that we carried out in advance of the current research eort.
We started the rst project in June 2015. In this rst step, we identied and analyzed
competence concepts in more than 120 German organizations.3 rough an expert
screening and analysis, we were able to identify main dimensions of action competence
within the overall concepts submitted by the participating organizations. According to
the expert’s opinion, about 20 organizations proved to have very advanced, developed,
and elaborated conceptions and documented approaches for competence development
with their employees and advanced learning architectures. Within these documents,
experts also found evidence of skill and competence descriptions, which are seen as im-
portant and essential for individuals’ and organizations’ performances in future markets
and activities.
e international Delphi study we are reporting on here is based on these results.
Having gained insights into future skills, cultural and organizational changes, as well as
organizations’ reactions to these new demands, the Delphi’s main intention was fourfold:
1. to gain insights into the main drivers of change and factors resulting from these
drivers;
2. to capture the likelihood for dierent scenarios about the organization of higher
education in the future, about
3 ese had been identied through a tender oer – the Dual Partner Award. To win this award,
organizations were asked to provide details about their competence models and trainings oered to
promote their employees’ skill formation. Winners were then invited to participate in a qualitative
interview study.
Ulf-Daniel Ehlers
316
3. important skills for future graduates, and
4. learning design and study experiences of future higher education.
We invited 53 international experts from dierent organizations and institutions. ey
worked within higher education institutions, as researchers in the eld of pedagogy,
networks concerned with learning and skill formation topics, the digitalization of higher
Figure 1: Overview on agreement levels and adoption times of the four pillars of change in future higher
Future Skills for a European Higher Education
317
education or within NGOs. It was important to us, to consider the perspectives of
both, representatives from higher education institutions as well as from consultants and
practitioners from the economy. Further, we paid close attention to the fact that within
the two sub-samples, people occupying dierent positions were included in order to
capture the plurality of opinions on the topics surrounding the future of learning, skills
and higher education. Almost 50 international experts participated in round 1, repre-
senting 17 dierent countries (Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany,
China, Italy, Lithuania, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, and the United Kingdom). Although the sample predominantly represents
European views, some experts also came from North America, Asia and Oceania, with
Europe representing 89% of the overall respondents.
2. A Three-Dimensional Model for Future Skills
e analysis resulted in a reconstruction of factors which are underlying future skills and
reveals insights into the form and importance of learning in todays and future profes-
sional work environments of advance “future” organizations, as well as a reconstruction
of those specic individual abilities and skills which will be necessary to deal with chal-
lenges in professional future work environments. We found that the inherent structure
of future skills could be classied according to its inherent inner structure into three
dimensions: subject – object – and environment. e three dimensions allow to allocate
skills according to their relation to subject – object – world. All three dimensions are
interrelated. We are introducing this threefold distinction (Figure 3) because any kind
of ability or action can either be an expression to shape
a. an individuals’ relation to itself in past, present or future (time dimension);
b. an individuals’ relation to a certain thing or object (object dimension);
c. an individuals’ relation to somebody else or a group in the word (social dimension).
Figure 2: The threefold future skills model.
Ulf-Daniel Ehlers
318
is threefold distinction goes back to Meder (2007, also Roth, 1971) which are
presenting a foundational, constitutive structure for education as a threefold relation.
It thus allows to dierentiate skills which are related to individual perception, in-
dividual reection and development of awareness (subject related) and skills which are
related to things which can be experiences (objects), and thirdly related to the social
world (world). e three dimensions allow to describe more precisely which we refer to
future skills instead of just calling them skills. In all of the three dimensions shifts are
going on. e interview data reveal a clear change in nature of what is demanded in the
future in comparison to the past and in parts the present.
1. Subject related individual skills: Whereas in the past individuals could rely on
following requirements, the future will demand more self-organization instead.
2. Object related individual skills: Whereas in the past individuals could rely on
applying knowledge, methods and tools, the future will demand original creative
development of new knowledge, methods and tools.
3. World/organizational related skills: Whereas in the past organizations were orga-
nized and management according to clear structures, the future will demand uid,
enabling, agile cultures.
e gure shows that shifts take place in all three dimensions (third area of change).
In addition, data reveal shifts in dierent elds as well by emphasizing the greater im-
portance of individually responsibility for their own development, competence man-
agement and autonomous navigation through an ever faster changing environment.
Whereas in the past external structures were the scaold which provided guidance to
individuals, external scaolding will be less perceivable in the future. us, individuals
will have a greater role to be navigators themselves (second area of change – relational
structure). And, nally, the skills dimensions which will be important in the future are
also changing. Although the term skill is referring to a compound of elements (e.g.
Figure 3: Linking the Structural Education Model and the Skills Model as Conceptual Framework for the
Future Skills Model.
Future Skills for a European Higher Education
319
knowledge, skills, attitudes), the data emphasize certain elements with more importance
of the future and certain elements which will be providing basic foundation but will
not be sucient for the future. e gure shows that knowledge and application of
knowledge will be such foundational elements which will however, in the future not be
sucient for successful performance. Much more importance was given to the two ele-
ments “design” and “criticism/reection” for future performance.
All three dimensions interact with each other and are not sole expressions of isolated
skill domains. Subjective aspects inuence outlook on objective aspects as well as social
aspects impact subjective and objective aspects. e presented future skill model is thus
going beyond a static model of listing a set of dened skills. It is secondly going far
beyond digital or technical skills which will no doubt be important but represent just
one ingredient. eir values lie in the personal development of dispositions to act self-
organized in the respectively described domain.
e term “future skills” is dened as the ‘ability to act successful on a complex problem
in a future unknown context of action’. It refers to an individuals’ disposition to act in a
self-organized way, visible to the outside as performance.
As described above the future skills model divides future skills into three interrelated
dimensions and is capable of describing the wide array of future skills in a clearly struc-
ture and well described set of dimensions (Figure 2):
1. e rst Future Skill dimension is the subjective dimension of futures skills proles.
It is relating to an individuals’ subjective, personal abilities to learn, adapt and develop
in order to improve their opportunities to productively participate in the workforce of
tomorrow, actively shape the future working environment and involve themselves into
forming societies to cope with future challenges. It contains seven future skill proles.
2. e second Future Skill Dimension is relating to an individual’s ability to act self-
organized in relation to an object, a task or a certain subject matter related issue.
It is emphasizing a new approach which is rooted into the current understanding
of knowledge but is suggestion to take knowledge several steps up the ladder, con-
nect it to motivation, values and purpose and impregnate it with the disposition
to act self-organized in the knowledge domain in question. It is not just a quest
for more knowledge but for dealing with knowledge in a dierent way which is
resulting into professionalism and not into knowledge expertise.
3. e third Future Skill Dimension is relating to an individual’s ability to act self-
organized in relation to its social environment, the society and organizational en-
vironment. It is emphasizing the individual’s dual role as the curator of its social
portfolio of membership in several organizational spheres and at the same time
having the role of rethinking organizational spaces and creating organizational
structures anew to make it future proof. It contains an array of ve skill proles.
Ulf-Daniel Ehlers
320
Within the three dimensions, sixteen skill proles have been dened. A skill prole is an
array containing further subskills. A full report and description can be accessed at www.
nextskills.org.
4. Future Learning
e Delphi resulted into hallmark indications on the shift from academic education and
teaching to active learning of choice and autonomy. Higher education institutions in
the future will provide a learning experience which is fundamentally dierent than the
model of today. Timeframe for the time of adoption vary but for many aspects a close
or mid-term timeframe has been estimated through the Delphi experts. e dimen-
sions of future learning in higher education will comprise (1) structural aspects, i.e.
academic learning as episodical process between biographical phases professional and
private episodes throughout life, learning as institutional patchwork instead of the cur-
rent widest-spread one-institution-model of today, supported through more elaborated
credit transfer structures, micro-qualications and microcredentials, as well as aspect of
(2) pedagogical design of academic learning, i.e. changing practices of assessment,
also peer-validation, learning communities, focus on future skills with knowledge play-
ing an enabling role in interactive socio-constructive learning environments. In general
experts estimate structure changes to become relevant much later than changes related
to academic learning design.
Figure 4: Future Skills.
Future Skills for a European Higher Education
321
5. Drivers of Change in Higher Education
Four key drivers in the higher education market can be described. Each driver has a
radical change potential for higher education institutions and together they mutually
inuence each other and span the room in which higher education likely will develop.
ere are 2 content and curriculum related drivers (i.e. (1) personalized higher edu-
cation and (2) future skill focus) and 2 organization-structure related drivers (i.e. (1)
multi-institutional study pathways, (2) Lifelong Higher Learning).
e prole, shape and nature of higher education in the future will be most probably
a certain pattern of conguration along the impact each of the four key drivers, called
“pillars of change” has, and will inuence the development of higher education strategies.
1 - An emerging focus on future skills radically changes the current denition of graduate
attributes in higher education: e focus on a “next mode” of studying (focus on future
skills: autonomous learning, self-organization, applying and reecting knowledge, cre-
ativity and innovation, etc.) gradually replaces a reduced/narrow focus on academic and
valid knowledge acquisition as a means to provide correct answers for known questions
based on a curriculum which is focused on dened skills for xed professions.
Figure 5: Drivers of Change in Higher Education.
Ulf-Daniel Ehlers
322
2 - Higher education increasingly becomes a multi-institutional study experience: e
provision of higher education increasingly moves from a ‘one-institution’ model to a
‘multi-institution’ model in which higher education is provided through alliances of
several institutions.
3 - Students build their own personalized curriculum: e elements of choice in aca-
demic programs enlarge. e curriculum of academic programs moves from a fully pre-
dened and ‘up-front’ given structure to a more exible, personalized and participatory
model in which students actively cooperate with professors/teachers/advisors in curricu-
lum building of higher education programs.
4 - Higher education institutions turn towards providing oerings for lifelong higher
learning services: e current model of higher education, to prepare students (up front)
for a future profession, is equally complimented with higher lifelong learning oerings.
6. Four Scenarios for Future HE
e Delphi survey made a point to view future higher education from a students’ per-
spective and envisioned future learning experiences. Four scenarios for future higher
education can be described as gravitation centers of organizational development: (1) the
future skill university scenario, (2) the networked multi-institutional study scenario, (3)
the my-university scenario, (4) the lifelong higher learning scenario.
ree out of four scenarios score with a time of adoption of more than 10 years from
today with the majority experts. Only the lifelong higher learning scenario scored for a
time for adoption within the next 5 years with the majority of experts.
1 - e ‘future skill’ university: e ‘future skill’ scenario suggests that higher educa-
tion institutions would leave the current model that focusses on knowledge acquisition.
Instead, new proles would be developed that emphasize graduates’ future skill devel-
opment. In this scenario, HE would mainly be organized around one key objective: to
enable the development of graduates’ future skills, i.e. complex problem solving, dealing
with uncertainty or developing a sense of responsibility, etc. is would not replace
but go beyond the current emphasis of knowledge acquisition and studying based on
dened curricula for xed professions.
2 - e networked, university: is scenario views higher education as a networked
study experience. It will not be down to a single institution providing a student with
a certain program, but that this role would be split among multiple institutions. is
means that ‘digital import’ and ‘digital export’ of parts of the curriculum would play a
signicant role. e standard HE study’s structure and experience would shift from a
“one-institution” model to a “multi-institutional” model.
3 - e “My-University” scenario: is scenario describes HEIs as spaces where the
elements of choices enlarge, and students can build their own curricula based on their
personal interests. e curriculum of academic programs in this scenario would move
from a fully predened and ‘up-front’ given structure to a more exible, personalized
Future Skills for a European Higher Education
323
and participatory model in which students actively cooperate with professors/teachers/
advisors in curriculum building of HE programs.
4 - e lifelong higher learning scenario: In this scenario, seamless lifelong higher
learning would be as important as initial higher education. Learners in the workplace
would be the main type of student, choosing their portfolio of modules according to
their personal skill needs and competence demands with high autonomy throughout
their lifetime. Institutions thus would oer micro-credentials, which students assemble
individually based on their own interests. Recognition of prior study achievements and
practical experience would enable permeable shifting between dierent providers, which
oer to bundle prior learning experience into larger certications.
References
Ashby W.R., 1956. An Introduction to Cybernetics. New York: Wiley.
Baethge M., Solga H., Wieck M., 2007. Berufsbildung im Umbruch. Signale eines überfälligen
Aufbruchs. Berlin: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, pp. 60, 37-58.
Balliester T., Elsheikhi A., 2018. e Future of Work: A Literature Review. ILO Research
Department, Working Paper No. 29. Geneva: International Labour Organization.
Bronfenbrenner U., 1977. Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American
Psychologist, 32(7): 513-531.
Brown B.B., 1968. Delphi process: A methodology used for the elicitation of opinions of experts (No.
RAND-P-3925). Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corp.
Deloitte, 2018. Reconstructing Jobs: Creating good jobs in the age of articial intelligence. Available
at: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/insights/us/ articles/AU308_Reconstructing-
jobs/DI_Reconstructing-jobs.pdf.
Deming D.J., 2017. e growing importance of social skills in the labor market. e Quarterly
Journal of Economics, 132(4): 1593-1640.
Drakenberg M., 2004. Kontinuitet eller förändring? [Continuity or change?]. Equal Ordkraft
(Power of Words) project, Report, Municipality of Helsingborg/Malmö University.
Ehlers U.D., 2020. Future Skills – Zukunft des Lernens, Zukunft der Hochschule. Springer.
Ellebracht H., Lenz G., Osterhold G., Schäfer H., 2009. Systemische Organisations-und
Unternehmensberatung. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.
European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (CEDEFOP), 2012. Brieng Note:
Preventing skill obsolescence. Available at: http://www.cedefop. europa.eu/les/9070_en.pdf.
Helmer O., 1967. Analysis of the future: e Delphi method (No. RAND-P-3558). Santa Monica,
CA: RAND Corp.
Hirsch-Kreinsen H., 2016. Digitization of industrial work: development paths and prospects.
Journal of Labour Market Research, 49(1): 1-14.
Linstone H.A., Turo M., 1975. e Delphi method: Techniques and applications. London:
Addison-Wesley.
McKinsey & Company, 2018. Skill Shift: Automation and the Future of the Workforce. Discussion
Paper. McKinsey Global Institute (MGI).
Meder N., 2007. Der Lernprozess als performante Korrelation von Einzelnem und kultureller
Welt . E ine b ild un gst he ore tis ch e E xpl ik ati on de s B eg ris. Spektrum Freizeit, 07(1-2): 119-135.
Ulf-Daniel Ehlers
324
Noweski C., Scheer A., Büttner N., von ienen J., Erdmann J., Meinel C., 2012. Towards
a paradigm shift in education practice: Developing twenty-rst century skills with design
thinking. In: Plattner H., Meinel C., Leifer L. (eds.), Design inking Research. Understanding
innovation. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 71-94.
OECD, 2017. Future of Work and Skills. 2nd Meeting of the G20 Employment Working Group.
Hamburg. Retrieved online from: https://www.oecd.org/els/emp/wcms_556984.pdf.
OECD, 2017. OECD Digital Economy Outlook 2017. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.
org/10.1787/9789264276284-en.
OECD, 2017. OECD Employment Outlook 2017. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.
org/10.1787/empl_outlook-2017-en.
OECD, 2018. A Brave New World: Technology and Education. Trends Shaping Education
Spotlights, No. 15. Available at: www.oecd.org/education/ceri/Spotlight-15-A-Brave-New-
World-Technology-and-Education.pdf.
OECD, 2018. e Future of Education and Skills. Education 2030. Position Paper. Retrieved
online from: https://www.oecd.org/education/2030/E2030%20Position%20 Paper%20
(05.04.2018).pdf.
OECD, 2019. Trends Shaping Education 2019. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/
trends_edu-2019-en
Playfoot J., Hall R., 2009. Eective Education for Employment: A global perspective A re-
port commissioned by Edexcel and prepared by White Loop Eective Education for
Employment: A global perspective, Edexcel, White Loop. Available at: http://www.eee-ed-
excel.com/xstandard/docs/eective_education_for_employment_web_version.pdf. Accessed
on 15 December 2017.
PwC (2018). Will robots really steal our jobs? An international analysis of the potential long-term
impact of automation. Available at: https://www.pwc.com/hu/hu/kiadvanyok/assets/pdf/im-
pact_of_automation_on_jobs.pdf.
Roth H., 1971. Pädagogische Anthropologie. Band II, Entwicklung und Erziehung. Grundlagen
einer Entwicklungspädagogik. Hannover: Schroedel.
Rowe G., Wright G., 1999. e Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: Issues and analysis.
International Journal of Forecasting, 15(4): 353-375.
Smith J., 2018. Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Degrees (June 11). Retrieved online on 14.12.2018
from https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/.
Teichler U., 2009. Higher education and the world of work: Conceptual frameworks, compara-
tive perspectives, empirical ndings. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
omas D.R., 2006. A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data.
American Journal of Evaluation, 27(2): 237-246.
VERBI Software, 2017. MAXQDA 2018 [computer software]. Berlin, Germany: VERBI
Software. Available at: https://www.maxqda.com.
World Economic Forum, 2018. Towards a Reskilling Revolution: A Future of Jobs for All.
