ADMISSION TO HIGHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS
The Act on higher education should be mentioned first among legislation
regulating admission. The rule set forth in Section c) of Paragraph (2)
of Article 64 of the Act constitutes the basis for the legal background
of admissions, pursuant to which, an specifically identified instance
of the autonomy of higher educational institutions provided for by the
Act is the specification of admission criteria. The institutions determine
the number of students that can be admitted within their own scope of
control, and select their prospective students from the applicants at
their own discretion. This, of course, must take place within a legislative
framework, autonomy may not mean that an institution would not be obliged
to respect general principles of law and the legislative provisions governing
admissions. Paragraph (4) of Article 83 of the Act obliges institutions
to publish entrance examination criteria at least two years, and other
criteria at least one year, prior to their introduction, in the Information
bulletin on higher educational admissions. Another essential source of
law for this legal area is Government Decree 269/2000 (XII. 26.) on the
General admissions rules of higher educational institutions. In addition
to legislation, higher educational institutions are also bound by the
provisions of the admissions regulations of their own institution.
| Following a complaint,
we established that pursuant to Government Decree 269/2000 (XII.
26.), every institution is obliged to provide access for the applicants
to its admissions regulations. In order to fulfil this responsibility,
a higher educational institution may choose various equally legal
methods of information. A copy of these regulations may, of course,
be offered for a certain fee. (K-OJOG-374/2001.) |
The institutional autonomy following from the cited provisions of the
Act on Higher education also means that the Commissioner for Educational
Rights does not have the authority to investigate the content of decisions
on admissions or the evaluation of the fulfilment of admissions criteria.
Our Office may only investigate whether the institutions fulfilled the
safeguarding procedural requirements of legislation and institutional
regulations governing admissions.
| A complainant submitted
an application for review to the head of an institution because
they found the marks given for their answers to certain questions
too low. The complainant contacted us after being rejected. In line
with the above, we were not authorised to proceed in their case,
we informed the complainant that the establishing of points given
for answers to examination questions are at the sole discretion
of the examiner. (K-OJOG-366/2001.) |
The Ministry of Education provides for the publication of the Information
bulletin on higher educational admissions (hereinafter referred to as
the Information bulletin) through the National Higher Educational Admissions
Office (OFI). The Information Bulletin specifies the admissions criteria
of all institutions; its significance is further enhanced by the inclusion
of general information on the admission proceedings. With a view to the
role of this publication and to the possibility of its erroneous or incomplete
contents causing an infringement of the constitutional right to pursue
tertiary studies or direct threat thereof, we launched an ex officio investigation
in connection with the contents of the Information Bulletin on the basis
of several applications related to some shortcomings in the information
contained in the Information bulletin.
| We brought the following
findings to the attention of Minister of Education. The Information
Bulletin for the Year 2001 described itself as legislation governing
the admission proceedings while it is not regarded as legislation
in the Hungarian system of sources of law. The Information Bulletin,
in several places, specified information with respect to the instances
of foreign nationals being allowed to enrol in a training class
financed by the state without explaining the exact rule governing
this issue. Furthermore, legislation does not prohibit the modification
of application forms by the applicants following their submission
but before the expiry of the deadline for submission, while the
Information Bulletin explicitly precluded this option. Again, without
an explicit legislative provision, the Information Bulletin specified
that the data specified on Form A is governed in the case of a difference
in the completion of application forms. There was a misleading piece
of information in the publication that referred to the waiving of
payment by those receiving child care allowance and child care benefit.
This opportunity is indeed only offered to those enrolled in state-owned
higher educational institutions and is not available at all in military
and in policing higher educational institutions. The reference to
the financing of students working towards a second degree in teaching
was again inaccurate, and the exact terms and conditions of exemption
were not mentioned. According to the Information Bulletin, those
holding a tertiary degree may in any case enrol in a training class
subject to payment; the publication did not include the exceptions
from this general rule. According to the Information Bulletin, if
an applicant entitled to participate in training financed by the
state specifies a place where both forms of financing exist, but
chooses the cost payment form only, the National Higher Educational
Admissions Office automatically adds the state-financed form to
the cost payment form when recording the data. We established that
this provision has no legislative grounds. And finally: the Information
Bulletin specified a special rule governing the so-called cross-semester
training in several places, while information in this regard has
no legislative grounds either. The Minister accepted our findings.
Therefore we closed our investigation while continuing the monitoring
of the development of the contents of the Information Bulletin and
the indication of any problems which may arise from time to time
with controlling the enforcement of our findings in a subsequent
investigation, if necessary. (K-OJOG-479/2001) |
Several applicants protested against the infringements of rights in the
course of examinations, the infringement of safeguarding procedural rules
governing the course of examinations that are regarded as fundamental
guarantees of the lawful conduct of admissions.
| A complainant's application
concerned the course of an oral examination. Pursuant to the admissions
regulations of the institution concerned in the case, the applicant
draws an introductory topic at the examination, and this did not
take place. The regulations do not allow the board to discard the
drawing of a topic or the presentation of an answer. On the basis
of the statements sent by the institution, we established that the
institution failed to comply with the provisions of its own admissions
regulations. In the same case, the complainant protested against
the type of questions brought forward during the oral examination.
On the basis of available documents, we established that personal
questions and questions inquiring about the applicants choice of
political daily papers were also brought forward during the examination.
It is our position that personal questions are not suitable for
the purpose of an entrance examination set forth in the regulations
of the institution, that is, to achieve the selection of the best
prepared and apt applicants for the particular profession. Personal
questions may, furthermore, give the impression to an applicant
that any answer given to them or the possible refusal to answer
them may affect the evaluation of their entrance examination performance.
The question concerning the knowledge of daily papers may again
give the impression to an applicant that the conclusion drawn from
their answer with regard to their own or their family's political
beliefs may affect the evaluation of their entrance examination
performance. With a view to all the above, in the particular case,
we initiated action so that full compliance with the provisions
of the admissions regulations be ensured during the entrance examinations.
The institution accepted this initiative. (K-OJOG-364/2001) |
|
previous 
