The Concept of Professional Development states:
“The competence of the Ministry of Education and Science in professional development is:
1) to implement consolidated national policy and strategy,
2) to develop draft legislation,
3) to organize quality assessment of teachers and education managers;
4) to provide state financing for national professional development programs and projects, and coordi-nation and support for professional development;
5) to organize state recognition and accreditation of programs and approve professional development;
6) to coordinate professional development of teach-ers and research projects;
7) to develop guidelines for professional develop-ment programs and recommendations on methodology;
8) to prepare public tenders and recommendations for granting state financing;
9) to organize a quality and efficiency assessment of professional development programs.”
“Non-governmental organizations and higher edu-cation institutions develop and implement profes-sional development programs, projects and study pro-grams.””
According to the Education Law, the Ministry of Education and Science “should implement the national policy and development strategy in educa-tion, develop draft legislaeduca-tion, organize education and professional development of teachers, and coordinate research and methodology”. Consequently, neither the Ministry, nor any of the institutions subordinated to the Ministry should provide professional develop-ment programs. It is the only way to develop positive competition among providers of professional develop-ment programs and at the same time to ensure capacity building for professional development service providers in Latvia, as well as to be as close as possi-ble to the customer.
When preparing the paper (June–November, 2002) the author faced a fact that hardly any reliable and recognized data on activities in the professional development system of Latvia are available. Therefore, one can raise the issue how would it be possible to research and forecast trends in the professional devel-opment system, given the lack of reliable information which can be used for analysis.
Recommendations
To provide all schoolchildren in Latvia with equal education opportunities, first, equal education oppor-tunities should be provided for all teachers in Latvia.
A few suggestions to achieve the goal:
•to develop a professional in-service training sys-tembased on a strong theoretical framework with stable financing, irrespective of political changes;
•to guarantee subsidies to schools or education boards to support professional development of teachers, by means of which professional develop-ment can be tailor-made to meet local needs;
•to develop the capacity of professional develop-ment program providers in Latvia, with the Ministry
remaining responsible for strategy and regulatory control;
•to provide teachers real access to quality and advanced services of information and communica-tion technology.
References
Bïrzi¿a Å. (2002, 28.02.). Par pedagogu tÇlÇkizgl¥t¥bu 2002. gadÇ. Izgl¥t¥ba un Kultra, R¥ga.
Desmitniece K. (2002). TÇlÇk? Izgl¥t¥ba. TÇlÇk? // Vïstis Skolai, nr. 35.
Geske A. (2000). MatemÇtikas un dabaszinÇt¿u izgl¥t¥bas att¥st¥bas tendenãu starptautiskais pït¥jums 1995–1999.
R¥ga: MÇc¥bu grÇmata.
Geske, A., Gr¥nfelds, A., Kangro, A. (2001). The Quality of Education in Latvia in the International and National Context.
In: A Passport to Social Cohesion and Economic Prosperity.
Report on education in Latvia 2000. R¥ga: Sorosa fonds – Latvija.
ISAP (2002). Skolu vïrtï‰anas un att¥st¥bas plÇno‰anas rokasgrÇmata. R¥ga: IZM, Izgl¥t¥bas sistïmas att¥st¥bas pro-jekts.
Izgl¥t¥bas likums (1991, 15.08.). Izgl¥t¥bas likums. Zi¿otÇjs, nr. 31, R¥ga.
IZM (1996a, 21.11.). IZM TÇlÇkizgl¥t¥bas departamenta infor-mÇcija. Izgl¥t¥ba un Kultra, R¥ga.
IZM (1996b, 10.09.). Par pedagogu profesionÇlÇs meis-tar¥bas pilnveidi.IZM TÇlÇkizgl¥t¥bas departaments,.R¥ga.
IZM (1998). Izgl¥t¥bas att¥st¥bas stratïÆiskÇ programma, 1998.–2003. R¥ga: IZM.
IZM (2000a, 03.11.). TÇlÇkizgl¥t¥ba LatvijÇ – realitÇte un v¥zija. Konferences materiÇli. LR IZM TÇlÇkizgl¥t¥bas att¥st¥bas fonds, R¥ga.
IZM (2000b). VispÇrïjÇs izgl¥t¥bas iestÇÏu direktoru reÆio-nÇlo konferenãu darba materiÇli. 22.03.2000.–05.04.2000.
R¥ga: IZM VispÇrïjÇs izgl¥t¥bas departaments.
LU (1996). SkolotÇju tÇlÇkizgl¥t¥ba. Rakstu krÇjums. R¥ga:
Latvijas UniversitÇte.
Mertaugh, M. (2002). Education in the Accession Countries.
Washington D. C.: The World Bank.
OECD (2000). Literacy in the Information Age. Paris and Ottawa: OECD and Statistics Canada.
OECD (2001). Reviews of National Policies for Education.
Latvia. Paris: OECD.
P∫avniece A. (1997).PÇrskats par pedagogu tÇlÇkizgl¥t¥bas sistïmas darb¥bu (1995.–1997. g.). R¥ga: IZM PIAC Pedagogu tÇlÇkizgl¥t¥bas da∫a.
WB (2002).Transition, the First Ten Years: Analysis and Lessons for Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union.
Washington D. C.: The World Bank.
TTM (2002).In-Service Teacher Training System. Hungary:
In-Service Teacher Training Methodological and Information Centre.
MEMT (2000). Learning for Life. Canada, Toronto: Ministry of Education and Ministry of Training.
Professional Development Planning, http://www.ascd.org/trai ningopportunities/ossd/planning.html (retrieved 03.11.
2002).
The OECD programme for international student assessment, http://www.pisa.oecd.org (retrieved 20.10.2002).
Summary
Latvia has a state-established financial support sys-tem providing different assistance to students who have been granted state-financed study slots and stu-dents covering their tuition fees from personal resources. Some students receive scholarships/grants and partly paid public transport fares. Students who study at state accredited tertiary institutions may also receive state-guaranteed loans from resources of credit institutions for payment of tuition fee and cov-ering daily living costs. A much more limited number of students may receive loans from credit institutions on the basis of an individual agreement, but this trend is developing. Public foundations, legal entities and individuals also offer student loans and scholarships.
However, not all young people can receive funding for acquiring higher education within the state-estab-lished student funding system. The paper analyses the existing student support system and concludes that state support is not linked to the financial situation of the students. Consequently, the state funding is not allocated to the students who are in the most need of it. Considering the increasing social and economic stratification of society, the paper concludes that stu-dent funding should be based not only on stustu-dent academic performance, but also on their income levels.
Problem
A merit-based public student funding system does not provide equal access to higher education for young people coming from low-income families. Thus it enhances the social stratification in Latvia.
Introduction
There is a worldwide trend of gradual transfer of higher education costs from the government and tax-payers to students and their parents. This fact is evi-denced by increasing tuition fees in the countries where they have existed before and introduction of tuition fee in those countries where higher education traditionally has been free of charge. Such example in Western Europe is Great Britain and among socialist countries China (Weifang, 2001). The aforemen-tioned trends are also observed in the Central and East European countries, including Latvia, where the state monopoly on higher education was abolished by the Education Law of 1991, which allowed to estab-lish higher education institutions and to introduce tuition fees. Since then an increasing number of stu-dents in tertiary institutions do not receive any public funding. For example, in the academic year 1990/1991 all 46,000 students studied in the uni-versities of Latvia free of charge (SSK, 1992: 176). In the academic year 2001/2002 the number of
stu-Student Loans and Access to Higher Education in Latvia
Rita Ka‰a
It should be mentioned that costs of education increase social stratification in Latvia, as many young people who wish to study cannot cover the study expenses. Besides, the widest offer of higher educa-tion concentrates in Riga where the living costs are the highest in the country1. In study year 2001/2002 about 80% of all Latvian students studied in Riga (IZM, 2001b).
The experience of different countries shows that there is no identical or ideal model of student funding that would provide equal access to higher education for all students representing different social layers.
However, there are similar measures different coun-tries use to reach the goal. These measures can be classified into two groups. The first group includes scholarships and various grants, the second funding in the form of loans.
Funding of students in the form of lending has par-ticularly developed over the last decade of the twenti-eth century. At the same time it is observed that coun-tries, when allocating grants, pay special attention to students from low-income families or families whose annual income is below a defined level. Granting of scholarships is also related to student academic per-formance.
In Latvia non-reimbursable state support is avail-able only to those students who have won the com-petition for funded study slots in the state-owned higher education institutions. The tuition fee for those students is covered by the state, and they are also entitled to state scholarship and in special cases may apply for an additional grant or allowance.
public funding of students is not connected with the income level of the student’s family. Namely, public funding for tertiary education is provided only to stu-dents with good grades, irrespective of whether they need it more than others.
To provide students with an opportunity to raise funds for their studies, the state at first established a loan system for covering the living costs of the student and the tuition fee. Within this system loans were fur-nished by the state. Later the system was modified and now the loans are provided from the resources of commercial banks and guaranteed by the state2.
This article will present an overview of the student financial support system in Latvia, analyze its draw-backs and offer solutions for possible improvement or alteration of the financial flow mechanism in order to enhance accessibility of higher education in Latvia.