Tunnustetaanko tutkinnot? Tutkintojen tunnustaminen Euroopan unionissa esimerkkinä Suomen ja Saksan liittotasavallan tutkintojen vastavuoroinen tunnustaminen

Abstract

Henkilö, joka haluaa työskennellä toisessa Euroopan unionin jäsenmaassa, joutuu erikseen hakemaan tutkintonsa tunnustamista silloin, kun hänen ammattinsa on tulomaassa säännelty. Ammatit, joihin on asetettu lainsäädännössä tai hallinnollisilla määräyksillä kelpoisuusvaatimuksia, ovat sääneltyjä.

Väitöstutkimuksessa selvitetään, miten hyvin tutkintojen tunnustaminen toimii Suomen ja Saksan liittotasavallan välillä. Tutkimusaineistona ovat olleet kummankin maan viranomaisten tekemät päätökset ja lausunnot.

Tutkimus osoitti, että yleisesti ottaen tutkintojen tunnustaminen tapahtuu direktiivien mukaisesti. Useimmissa tapauksissa maasta toiseen muuttavan tutkinto sai tulomaassa ja lähtömaassa samanlaisen kohtelun. Kuitenkin oli tapauksia, joissa tutkintoa ei saatu tunnustettua lainkaan tai joissa ulkomaisen todistuksen haltija joutui huonompaan asemaan.

Suomalaiselle lisensiaatin tutkinnolle ei Saksasta löydy vastinetta, vaan sen katsotaan olevan Doktor-tutkinnon esiaste, joka sijoituu yliopiston loppututkinnon ja tohtorin tutkinnon väliin. Sen sijaan Suomen tohtorin tutkinnot ja Saksan Doktor-tutkinnot tunnustettiin vastavuoroisesti.

Ammatillisista tutkinnoista erityisen ongelmallisia olivat suomalaiset teknillisissä oppilaitoksissa suoritetut insinöörin tutkinnot. Koska ne eivät ole korkeakoulutukintoja, ei niitä Saksassa hyväksytä ylemmän tutkintotodistusten tunnustamisesta annetun direktiivin 89/48/ETY piiriin. Tästä voi seurata ongelmia, koska Saksassa saatetaan vaatia, että tietystä projektista, esimerkiksi rakennushankkesta, vastuussa olevilla on em, direktiivin mukainen tutkinto. Ammattikorkeakouluissa suoritetut insinöörin tutkinnot tunnustetaan vastaamaan Saksan Fachhochschule-tutkintoja.

Suomalaiset toisen asteen ammatillisen tutkinnon suorittaneet eivät aina päässeet Saksassa mestarikoulutukseen. Perusteluna oli, ettei suomalaiseen koulutukseen sisältynyt riittävästi käytännön työtä. Asialla on merkitystä, jos haluaa paerustaa Saksaan käsityöalan yrityksen, koska tällöin vaaditaan ko. alan mestarin tutkinto.

The present study looks into the practises used in the European Union for the comparison and mutual recognition of qualifications. In the European Union equivalence of qualifications is considered as an important but at the same time problematic issue. The study aims at finding out if the international recommendations concerning academic recognition of qualifications and the directives guiding the professional recognition in the European Union provide a sufficient basis for recognition. Is it possible to recognise different qualifications in such a manner that persons who have taken their qualifications in one EU Member State would obtain the same professional rights in another EU Member State? Which factors cause difficulties in recognition? The data used for this study comprises decisions on mutual recognition of qualifications.

Although the study has been carried out to meet practical needs, problems have been approached from a theoretical angle. The theoretical background is based on a review of the methods of Comparative Education.

The section describing the comparison of Finnish and German qualifications is based on three types of data: descriptions of education systems, descriptions of single qualifications and official decisions on recognition and comparison as well as advisory statements. The basic sources for the descriptions of education systems have been the country profiles of Eurydice, the information network on education in Europe. Descriptions of single qualifications have been taken from guides for prospective students. The German data comprises the recommendations on equivalence between German and Finnish qualifications. The recommendations were given in 1994 1996 by Zentralställe für ausländisches Bildungswesen, the German body which defines equivalence between qualifications. The Finnish data consists of the decisions on recognition and advisory statements on equivalence made by the Finnish Ministry of Education and the National Board of Education.

The study indicates that the system of recognition of qualifications between the two countries generally follows regulations. In most of the cases, qualifications of persons moving from one country to the other are recognised on the same level as they are defined in their country of origin. However, in some cases the qualification could not be recognised at all, or the level of the foreign diploma was assessed lower than in the country of origin. Persons moving from Finland to Germany after comprehensive school find problematic the fact that completion of comprehensive school does not yield eligibility for Gymnasiale Oberstufe, but one year s supplementary studies are required, as comprehensive school lasts nine years in Finland. The matriculation examination is at present mutually recognised when prospective students are applying for admission to higher education institutions.

German Fachhochschule qualifications and Finnish polytechnic qualifications are mutually recognised at present. In the same manner the Finnish higher academic degrees and German degrees Diplom, Magister and Staatsprüfung are mutually recognised on the same level in both countries. On the other hand, the Finnish lower academic degrees do not have counterparts in the German one-tier degree structure. Intermediate degrees have not existed in Germany, and the normative length of studies before graduation has been five years. The situation is, however, changing as nowadays it is possible to take bachelor-level degrees also in Germany. In German universities the first academic degree may lead directly to doctoral studies. In Finland a student may take a two-year licentiate degree (in Finnish lisensiaatti) after completion of the higher academic degree. The licentiate degree has no counterpart in Germany, but it is considered a pre-doctoral degree between the graduation and the doctoral degree. The Finnish and German doctorates (in Finnish tohtori, in German Doktor) were mutually recognised in the data. Specifically problematic among the vocational qualifications are engineers qualifications taken in Finnish technical institutions. In Finland these qualifications are included in vocational higher education under the directive 89/48/EEC. In Germany, however, they are not classified under the same directive as they are not part of the higher education. In the field of Social Services, a few former Finnish qualifications remained without German counterparts due to insufficient length of studies. As to the present qualifications, the problem has disappeared, as the studies last longer.

Finns who had completed a secondary vocational qualification had not always been accepted to the German Meister/in training. This was based on the argument that the Finnish training did not contain enough practical work. In Germany, the Meister/in qualifications do not belong to the official education system, and access to this training is not considered part of the recognition of qualifications. The issue is nevertheless important, as in Germany an enterprise in the field of Crafts may be founded only after completion of Meister/in qualification. Also the qualifications which are not in the scope of the regulations guiding recognition of qualifications remained problematic. For example, the further vocational qualifications and the specialist vocational qualifications, taken in Finland as competence-based qualifications, do not fall into the general system of recognition of diplomas, as the duration of studies has not been determined officially.

One of the goals of the study was to develop a basis which includes relevant criteria for professional recognition and comparison of qualifications taken in another Member State of the European Union. The development was carried out using the methodological model of Shaul Robinsohn. The following criteria were found suitable for professional recognition of qualifications: the level of the qualification in the national education system, the length of studies, the tasks for which the qualification yields competence and the profession(s) for which the qualification yields competence. The contents of the studies are compared only for a specific reason. According to the directives regulating recognition of qualifications, a mutual confidence should reign between the Member States of the European Union as to the competence for practising a profession: competence recognised in one Member State should be recognised also in other Member States. Therefore evaluation of the quality of studies and the student s performance are not included in the relevant criteria for professional recognition of qualifications. The study also comprises a practical model developed to facilitate the comparison of qualifications. It progresses step by step and finally leads to the decision on recognition if it is possible according to the legal regulations in force.

The study indicates that the most important reasons for difficulties in recognition of qualifications are the structural differencies between the education systems. Problems also appear if the level of a qualification yielding competence for a certain profession is different in the education systems of the two countries. In case the education system of the new country of residence does not include the same type of qualification as the diploma of the applicant or if the same kind of institution does not exist, the applicant s qualification has to be compared to the most similar qualification in the new country. In some cases the equivalence cannot be determined and the applicants often feel that their treatment has been different from that of the country of origin. As to the recognition of qualifications, convergence of the qualification structures as it is proposed in the Bologna Declaration would be desirable, as it would facilitate recognition. The possible structural changes will however benefit only the persons who will complete their studies in the future.