1. Helena Popovic Faculty of Political Science University of Zagreb
Global Supplementary Grant Program – Europe Spring Conference, March 2013 Clare College, Cambridge
Helena Popovic
Faculty of Political Science
University of Zagreb

2. European Study Reform: The Bologna Declaration (1999)
Objectives:
1. easily readable and comparable degrees (employability)
2. three-cycle degree system in HE: first cycle - undergraduate, Bachelor, 180 or 240 ECTS; second cycle - graduate, Master, 90 or 120 ECTS; third cycle - doctoral, PhD
3. Establishment of a system of credits - the ECTS system - student mobility
4. Promotion of mobility (for students and teachers, researchers and administrative staff)
5. European co-operation in quality assurance - comparable criteria and methodologies
6. necessary European dimensions in higher education (HE) (curricular development, inter-institutional co-operation, mobility schemes and integrated programs of study, training and research.
Bologna - voluntary process - political commitments of education ministers.
Aim – shorten the period of study (3 years), increase the population with HE

3. Higher Education in Croatia
Historically influence practices and structures - Germany
Context: transition
Major reforms in higher education since the 1990s - massification trends - between 1990/91 and 2007/08 - the number of students rose 95% (Dolenec, 2010)
A - two types of higher education institutions: universities and professional higher education institutions (called universities of applied sciences or colleges)
B - Public and private higher education institutions
Year 2009/2010:
University students - 78%;
Universities of applied sciences students - 15%;
University colleges of applied sciences - 6%;
Universities (academies) - 1 % . (Doolan, Dolenec, Domazet, 2012, source: Croatian Bureau of Statistics, 2009)
Croatia – Bologna Declaration – Prag, 2001.
Implemented in 2005./2006. – in Croatia

4. Students by field of studies - largest number of students study social sciences, business and law (Doolan, Dolenec, Domazet, 2012)
International students - the share is 2.6%; majority from former Yugoslav countries (2.2%), 0.14% from EU countries (MZOS, 2007)
Academic staff - academic year 2009/ ,863 members of academic staff working at higher education institutions on a full-time or part-time basis. (Croatian Bureau of Statistics) - lack of consistent data on the numbers of academic staff
Academic staff - Ratio of students to teaching staff:
Academic year 2009/2010 (Croatian Bureau of Statistics, 2011) - 1:12.6 staff-student ratio (but differences between fields, significantly higher in the social sciences:
Number of students per teacher in Universities (2007)
Natural Sciences – 1:17
Technical Sciences – 1:23
Biomedical Science – 1:7
Biotechnical Science – 1:14
Social Sciences – 1:59
Humanities - 1:26
Source: Dolenec, D. (2010) Model financiranja visokog obrazovanja u Hrvatskoj. Zagreb: Institut za razvoj obrazovanja.

5. Main findings of the study:
Doolan, Karin, Dolenec, Danijela, Domazet, Mladen (2012)“The Croatian Higher Education Funding System in a European Context: A Comparative Study”. Zagreb: Institute for the Development of Education.
Data on higher education funding in Croatia – only partially available, not standardized (prevents comparison)
Countries included in the study: Austria, Germany, Hungary, Slovenia and Sweden (as a contrast)
Main findings of the study:
Croatia’s public investment into higher education as a proportion of its GDP is lower than that of the other countries included, as well as of the EU-27 average.
Croatia - in the middle with regard to proportion of public compared to private funding for higher education institutions (more public funding in Austria and Sweden, less in Slovenia, while Hungary is similar to Croatia at 70% of public funding).

6. Tuition fees - a major source of private funding in Croatia
Tuition fees - a major source of private funding in Croatia. - linear model of charging tuition fees annually depending on accumulated ECTS credits (unique to Croatia compared to the other countries).
There is an unregulated system of tuition fees across higher education institutions i- no limit on the maximum amounts (they vary between institutions and there are no clear criteria for determining fee levels )
The granting of exemptions - largely merit-based. Social criteria are not systematically taken into consideration.
Funding agreements between state and higher education institutions - annual process of negotiations
No incentives for promoting social equality in Croatia

7. Funds - determined by the allocation from the previous year (Hunjak 2008
The input criteria - number of state-subsidized full-time students, the number of employees and other material expenses.
Lump-sum budgeting was legislated in 2003 with the Act on Science and Higher Education.
State budget allocation of funds for universities (based on operational plans and the structure of staff positions); funds transferred to the universities via the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports.
Funding - staff salaries, material expenses, basic segments of scientific, artistic and expert research and research support services (libraries, IT departments, dormitories etc.), scholarships and loans, working and living conditions of employees and staff, and financial assistance for fees, development and investments.

8. Public investment into higher education, as a proportion of GDP (%) (Doolan, Dolenec, Domazet. 2012, source: Eurostat) - Spending on the tertiary level includes research and development spending at universities:
Austria – 1,49; Croatia – 0,95; Germany – 1,21; Hungary – 1,02; Slovenia – 1,22; Sweden – 1,82, EU average (EU 27) – 1,14 %
Funds allocated to the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports in Croatia – as a proportion of GDP:
2008 –3,48 %,
2009 – 3,64 %
2010 – 3,57 %;
2011 – 3,54 %
2012 – 3,41% ; 2012 – 3,54,
2013 – 3,21 % (Source: Ministry of Finance, RH)

9. Krištof, M. , Pisk, K. , Radeka, I
Krištof, M., Pisk, K., Radeka, I. (2011) Research conducted by the Independent Union of Science and Higher Education.
Research results: members of the academic community on the implementation of Bologna
Research conducted among the members of the Independent Union of Science and Higher Education
Aim – attitudes on the implementation of Bologna in Croatia
Conducted via electronic survey, May – July, 2010, (N=318)
Problems identified by the academic community in Croatia:
No strategy regarding the employment of junior faculty and non-academic staff
Lack of funding and equipment
Poorly developed international cooperation
Increase of administrative work and work-load in general
Inefficient education of secondary school students
Inadequate and poorly developed programs
Inconsistencies between the no. of ECTS and the real work-load
Lowering of criteria in the grading process
Lack of mobility of the whole academic community
Lack of external evaluation
B.A. level not recognized in the labor market

10. Current problems in the Academy: Bologna and/or broader social trends?
Decrease of funding - attack on the welfare state - ‘legitimized’ by depicting public institutions as an unnecessary financial burden to society
Commercialization of higher education (Tuition fees)
Social sciences and humanities particularly affected - ‘output’ not directly linkable to the market
Additional anomalies in Croatia:
Cuts: including research, engagement of junior faculty, publications, organization of conferences etc.
Major changes currently taking place at the legislative level:
Several attempts to introduce a new Act – unsuccessfully
Complete and sudden change of criteria for promotion as an indirect way to cut expenses -attempts: to block junior faculty to enter the tenure system; to force members of the scientific community to find resources abroad – including projects, publications etc. (violation of legal provisions by official institutions)
Difference between new rules applied for tenured faculty members (3 ranks— full professor, associate professor, assistant professor) and junior faculty
Tenure process: from weak criteria to extremely high criteria
Ministry of Science Education and Sports defining part of the criteria for the employment of ’20 extraordinary candidates’ (despite the declared University autonomy, and the existing legal provisions regulating the criteria and the procedure)