I don't believe this, how blind politics can be?
An MBA program can not be compared to a regular masters degree, it is something completely different, targeting youg professionals who want to invest in their career, and look for a highly specialized progamme worth a lot of money. If in Europe MBAs will be treated the same way as master programmes, and first of all not be allowed to cover the costs of a high profile study programme with according fees, this is the end of all the prestigious European business schools.

But apparently there is room for different interpretations in this Bologna agreement, as the ex. of France shows. We can just hope that Swedish politicians will soon understand that their decision is based on ignorance and that maybe they should try to be more informed about th idea of MBA.

It would be such a pity for the promising, internationally recognised SSE programs.

Whilst I understand all of the points made by all of the contributors above, and whilst I sympathise with those students who feel their degrees are devalued by the changes which are being enforced, I nevertheless think there are a couple of issues which have so far been overlooked. I'm no apologist for the Bologna accord, but I don't agree that high quality degrees and public funding are mutually exclusive. As for aiming to recruit a younger student base - I don't see (a) how that is in itself a bad thing, and (b) why that should necessarily pose a threat to those with more 'real world' experience who wish to pursue an MBA. Abolishing fees certainly poses a number of problems - chief among them over-subscription - but it also makes MBAs far more accessible to those not already in a position to pay big money. And that, surely, is to be welcomed both as a sign of increased equality of opportunity and as inviting greater competition, and potentially higher standards, amongst applicants.

I don't want to say anything against public funding of MBA programs, an MBA can be of good quality and cheaper than elsewhere in this case. Like in Germany for instance.

But this is more a question concerning the educational system, in some countries education is more subsidised than in others.

The problem of SSE does not lie here I'm afraid. If there was enough public funding to secure the same quality of the SSE MBA as when they charged a high fee, meaning that the same budget is spent for attracting/keeping good professors etc as when SSE was not free, they would not need to close the program, right? Obviously no public money comes to replace the fees, thus the program stops.

The outcome of the Swedish implementation of this accord is that only students financially backed by companies will be able to do an MBA, I don't see much of equality of chances left, MBA becomes totally elitist.

Absolutely, I completely agree. Not being familiar with the ins- and outs- of the situation at SSE I was - optimistically/naively, I admit - assuming that the Swedish government would have contingency measures in place to compensate for any shortfall in funding. Perhaps the most perverse thing about Bologna is that so much of it seems to assume that the British model for tertiary education deserves, at least in its more standardised aspects, to be replicated everywhere. Anyone who has spent any time in full-time education at a UK university will testify to the fact that our system not only fails increasing numbers of students, but it also contributes to the decline of standards. It also makes it harder and harder for students of more limited (ie normal) means to pursue their education as far as they can without either corporate sponsorship or very wealthy parents. Britain is on a fast-track to having comparatively few genuinely top-class universities and a great many middle-of-the-road degree factories. Those that do wish to maintain standards - such as Oxford, Cambridge, some of the London schools and a handful of others - will be forced to secceed from government in an attempt maintain even a measure of independence and avoid state-imposed limits on how they can raise and spend their own money. The net result will be that government refuses to fund such places at all, and they in turn will go entirely private, charging fees which few will be able to afford. In which case we might as well pretend the expansion of higher education which took place in the 1960s and '70s never happpened, and give in to the idea that education is only for those born into wealth.

Here endeth the rant.

I have applied at the studera.nu and send all the documents needed. So I have ranked my universities and received from the Halmstad University the following massage:
Conditions:
Your general eligibility is conditional: In order to begin your studies you must show that you fulfill the general requirement of a completed academic degree comprising of at least 180 ECTS credits or equivalent. The requirement must be fulfilled and the appropriate credentials presented to the institution when the programme/course starts at the latest.
Your eligibility for this course is conditional. In order to take this course you must, no later than the roll call, fulfill all specific requirements for the course.
In the selection group (SG) there is written Utländska akademiska meriter (UB)
My Merit rating (MR) in selection group (only shown if all entrance requirements are met) is 1250.
At the end is written Selection groups
LUMAS - Master programme
UB - Utländska akademiska meriter

Maybe someone can help me to clear the situation.
Please write?
Waiting for your reply?
Best regards,
Rusa