The Tirana commitments define six EHEA fundamental values and a monitoring direction; national and institutional evidence remains contextual.
Six values forming one higher education framework
The Tirana annex presents academic freedom, academic integrity, institutional autonomy, participation of students and staff in governance, public responsibility for higher education and public responsibility of higher education as an interconnected set. Review therefore loses meaning if one value is scored in isolation from the legal and institutional conditions affecting the others.[S1]
The annex presents academic freedom, academic integrity, institutional autonomy, participation of students and staff, public responsibility for higher education and the public responsibility of higher education as interconnected. Tension between the values is part of the governance question. Institutional autonomy, for example, operates with accountability, while public responsibility does not displace academic freedom.[S1]
Definitions adopted in the Tirana annex
Annex I supplies descriptions for each value and places implementation within democratic, autonomous and accountable higher education systems. The accompanying ministerial commitment introduces system-level monitoring. A sound evidence record consequently separates constitutional or statutory protection, institutional rules, actual decision practice and the experience of affected academic communities.[S1]
A complete evidence record separates the formal guarantee from its operation. Constitutional and statutory provisions show the system framework; institutional rules show allocated authority; minutes and case records show how decisions were made; and staff or student experience can disclose barriers absent from formal texts. The monitoring commitment makes definitions and transparent methodology essential if findings are compared across systems.[S1]
Evidence of participation in governance records more than the existence of elected bodies. It shows access to information, timing, representation, influence on the decision and protection from retaliation. Academic freedom evidence likewise includes formal protection, appointment and research decisions, complaints and remedies. The evidence set remains sensitive to confidentiality while still allowing the governing process to be examined.[S1]
Evidence from law, governance and lived practice
The statement operates within the EHEA political framework and addresses system and institutional conditions. It is relevant to universities, public authorities, staff and students, but the allocation of enforceable rights and duties follows applicable national and regional law.[S1]
The statement belongs to the European Higher Education Area political framework. It concerns public authorities, higher education institutions, staff and students across participating systems. Enforceable rights and procedures still follow applicable law. A review must identify whether it addresses system conditions, an institution's governance or an individual dispute because the evidence and competent authority differ.[S1]
What comparative monitoring cannot decide
A monitoring indicator can identify divergence without proving its cause. Formal guarantees may coexist with operational restrictions, while a disputed institutional decision may require facts unavailable in comparative datasets. Country comparison also needs stable definitions and transparent treatment of missing information.[S1]
An indicator may identify divergence without establishing its cause, legal significance or remedy. Formal protection can coexist with informal pressure, while an isolated dispute may not represent system practice. Cross-country comparison is sensitive to definitions, missing evidence and institutional diversity. Conclusions should remain at the level supported by the measure rather than becoming an unsupported ranking.[S1]
EHEA materials in ICEQC analysis
ICEQC uses the document here as an external policy reference only. The analysis neither ranks EHEA systems nor turns the six values into unpublished certification criteria. Later ICEQC standards are intentionally not attached to this earlier record.
ICEQC uses the Tirana materials only as external higher-education policy evidence. The six values are not transformed into unpublished criteria, and the analysis does not imply EHEA recognition of ICEQC. Later ICEQC standards are not applied to this earlier record.