1

1
Trends IVMain findings and conclusions

• Sybille Reichert
• EAIE/EAIR Joint Seminar, Amsterdam,
• 22nd of April 2005

2
Methodology Data collection analysis

• Institutions at the centre of the 2004/2005
  exercise
• 62 site visits to universities (incl. 14 Coimbra)
  7 other HEIs, variety of profiles, but all
  institutions which have started implementation
• for 29 of 40 Bologna countries
• interviews with multiple institutional players
• by teams of 2 persons (1 internat., 1 from
  national RC)
• Analysis of institutional responses, progress
  priorities
• concentrating on the 3 Bologna mid-term
  priorities (structures, recognition, quality)
  research
• taking account of the European national
  contexts
• through a questionnaire sent to Rectors
  Conferences
• through re-analysis of Trends III data

3
Bologna From national commitment to
institutional reality -- 2005

• It takes concerted action on all levels to make
  the European Higher Education Area a reality

national commitment
national legislation
national incentives/ support
institutional leadership/ policy
instit. communication deliberation decision
instit. reality
Almost all countries have by now introduced the
two cycles system. Few HEI were still waiting for
more detailed governm. regulations, some
governments plan amendments. But majority of HEIs
still find that nat.legisl. undermines auton.
decision-making
Only 6 countries have provided some funding for
implementation at institutional level
Bologna reforms have become an integral part of
inst. strategy
Role of academics investing lots of extra time
and ideas, taking up the challenge. Signs of
reform fatigue.
4
Degree Structures The Bachelor level 1

• Misconception that Bologna prescribes in any
  way 32.
• Many professors doubt that 3 y -degrees can be
  academically valid and relevant to labour market
  (seen as lowering of academic standards.
• Discussion still centred on nominal duration, not
  outcomes Some universities dont want to award
  same degrees as profess. sector.
• Content of traditional 4 (or 5) y programmes
  often compressed into 3 years. Ba curricula often
  reported to be more rigidly structured than
  traditional ones (many compulsory subjects and
  contact hours).
• Justified concern about one size fits all
  approach taken by many national laws in imposing
  3 y Bachelors Some disciplines argue that 3
  years are too short for a meaningful first degree
  and request more autonomy in designing their
  degree programmes.

5
Degree Structures The Bachelor level 2

• Ba graduates labour market or Ma-studies? Huge
  differences between countries. In UK, Ireland,
  Latvia, Lithuania, Turkey Ba are well accepted by
  labour market.
• In many HEI students felt badly informed about
  value of a Bachelor in its own right, most plan
  to go for a Master, often supported by
  professors.
• Emphasis on employability has impact on dual
  systems Universities in some binary systems fear
  competition from polytechnics Poly-Ba can be
  more attractive to employers (practical
  experience). Many want to see Ba-degrees as a
  platform for re-orientation towards a
  Ma-programme. Polytechnics more confident.
• Insufficient dialogue between HEI, governments
  with employers to give the Ba more credibility,
  and adapt public service employment (career,
  service grades, salary).

6
Degree Structures The Master level

• In spite of Bologna-Consensus on Ma programmes
  huge variety
• Duration In many countries 18060 ECTS not seen
  as internationally competitive.
• UK and IR 1y-Ma (often gt 60 ECTS) particularly
  attractive.
• 300 ECTS programmes continue to exist in some
  countries (PL, HG, IR, Scotland) and disciplines
  (medicine, engineering)
• Tendency to create too many M-prog no
  institutional strategy
• Ma progr. often designed with narrow focus on
  preceding Ba programmes. Some HEI welcome
  opportunity to define interdisciplinary Ma.
• Vertical mobility seen as a threat, not
  opportunity, Stand-alone Ma still the
  exception.
• Students worried about (future lack of) public
  funding for Ma level.

7
Degree Structures Joint Degrees

• Legal situation regarding JD is slowly improving.
  In most countries JD are now legally possible (at
  least not explicitly excluded), the others will
  amend their legislation.
• More interest than reported in Trends III survey
  (where level of interest in Joint Degrees had
  been medium to low).
• Existing programmes information and exact
  figures are available only in some countries.
• One of the biggest practical problems with JD is
  quality assurance/accreditation European
  guidelines would help.

8
Degree Structures Modularisation and Learning
Outcomes

• Many HEI have modularised their programmes (ECTS,
  TUNING), but very different interpretations of
  modularisation. Students welcome the concept of
  modularisation but complain it often has been
  done superficially, not leading to more
  flexibility.
• Many HEI are familiar with the concept of LO or
  competence-based learning, majority are in the
  process of implementing them and consider them a
  helpful tool. Very few HEI voiced explicit
  criticism or reservations against LO.
• Very positive reference to qualifications
  frameworks (QF) in DK and Scotland (curricular
  dev., recognition) but little has happened
  (Germany exception).

9
Access to higher education, progression through
the system

• Access to Ba programmes
• In many countries no real selection is possible
  all holders of formal qualification have to be
  admitted .Some HEI are worried that this will
  weaken their competitiveness at the European
  level.
• Access to Master programmes
• Most HEI can select candidates but even here
  some constraints can be found.
• Admission to doctoral level
• In most but not all HEI left to the discretion
  of the faculty.
• However, in a small group of HEI no selection
  seems to be possible at any point, neither at Ma
  nor at PhD level.
• More and more HEI want to select students that
  correspond to their institutional profile and
  quality standards.

10
Recognition Trends in Mobility

• Incoming European M. seems to have increased in
  many countries since 1999.
• Worries over decreasing outgoing M. Reasons
  rigid programmes, students more risk-conscious,
  finish on time, language, funding, jobs, Major
  obstacle to M. academic calendars across
  Europe-gt Agreement on end of first/beginning of
  second semester helpful.
• Consensus better preparation, guaranteed
  recognition needed. Using stay abroad for
  practical work, formal inclusion in curricula
  makes recognition easier.
• Few HEI use vertical M. strategically specific
  Ma programmes.
• Long-term mobility of academics in Europe
  important element of EHEA but very few data
  available.

11
Recognition of exchange mobility

• HEI that apply ECTS, in particular the learning
  agreement, report few or no problems with
  recognition of exchange m. Sometimes perception
  varies leadership/central administration
  consider it to work well, students dont.
• Very few HEI dont take responsibility for
  students seriously, occasionally refuse
  recognition, in spite of signed LA.
• Other HEI report difficulties linked to the
  superior quality of their own teaching/poor
  administrative handling at partner HEI.
• Some HEI still have difficulties in the
  validation of courses taken abroad, translation
  of marks, transfer of credits.
• Many called for a more European implementation
  of ECTS to preclude inconsistencies.
• More important than ever ERASMUS principle of
  mutual trust and confidence. HEI should compare
  the defined learning outcomes, not search for
  contents identical to their own.

12
Recognition ECTS

• A majority of HEI have implemented ECTS and use
  it both for accumulation and transfer.
• Others are still working on ECTS, concentrating
  on the accumulation aspect as they used ECTS for
  transfer before.
• Occasionally reservations were expressed
  regarding ECTS standards and levels and the ECTS
  grading scale.
• Moving from contact hours to student workload
  (how to assess workload) is still an issue in a
  number of HEI.
• ECTS as a transfer instrument can cause problems
  with regard to regulated professions in some
  countries, because of the existing strict
  directives regarding the curriculum.
• The discussion and emerging consensus on
  qualifications frameworks could help to find a
  more coherent approach to ECTS across Europe, in
  terms of workload and levels.

13
Recognition Diploma Supplement

• Most HEI will be able to issue the DS to every
  graduate in the course of 2005. Some had already
  introduced it before.
• All HEI plan a DS in English, some also in the
  national language.
• Frequent difficulties the student record system
  doesnt contain the necessary information, the
  institutional and/or national student data
  software has not yet been adjusted to Bologna,
  the DS requires a big IT effort because of the
  complexity of study itineraries, high costs -
  especially for translations.
• Major challenge for many HEI how to include
  learning outcomes in the DS to make it a truly
  informative document. Otherwise the DS may be
  technically correct but will fail in the
  essential regard to provide information on a
  graduates profile.

14
Recognition of non-formal/non-academic
qualifications

• Berlin Com recognition of prior learning must
  become an integral part of higher education
  activity. Debate on qualifications frameworks, on
  the Lisbon agenda give APL and APEL more
  visibility.
• But Trends IV shows that it is not yet perceived
  as an important topic in many institutions.
  Several HEI have no provision at all for this
  kind of recognition. A few indicated that, while
  there are no provisions yet, discussions have
  started, legislation will be changed.
• Only few countries and HEI have explicit
  strategies for the recognition of non-formal or
  non-academic recognition (mostly for mature or
  disadvantaged students, applicants with
  non-standard secondary education, e.g in
  architecture, medicine, sports sciences and fine
  arts.)

15
Recognition of national and foreign degrees

• Rec. of nat. degrees legally regulated/automatic
  in most countries.
• Unknown difficulties might arise with the
  recognition of Ba/Ma degrees greater variety of
  curricula -gt
• IRL and SC qualif. framework helpful tool for
  rec. of national deg.
• Foreign degrees many HEI (compared to Trends
  III) referred to their NARIC as a source of
  information and support.
• HEI in some countries have relative/full autonomy
  in the recognition of foreign degrees.
• In other countries this is still done by
  ministries through rather cumbersome procedures
  (naturalisation or homologation). Ministries
  should grant their HEI more autonomy in rec.
  decisions.
• The Lisbon Recognition Convention was quoted
  several times as a frame of reference for
  recognition of foreign degrees.

16
Quality Enhancement Putting Quality Assurance
into Context

• Quality Enhancement gt Quality Assurance
• Qual. Enhancement Sum of many methods of
  institutional development
• Ex Added value of Bologna reforms
• Opportunity to reflect and review curricula
• Opportunity to reform teaching methods (student
  centred learning, continous assessment, flexible
  learning paths)
• Strengthening horizontal communication and
  institutional transparency
• Most limiting factor for quality enhancement is
  not nature of internal or external QA but limits
  to resources when room for improvements
  identified.

17
Internal Quality Development

• Level of activity in internal qual. dev.
  processes has risen
• Focus largely on teaching and learning (all
  inst.), some attention student support services
• Research quality emphasis on external review,
  only a third of inst. have some form of internal
  res. review
• Internal qual. dev. of administration and support
  services less developed (less than a sixth of
  inst.) and more ad hoc
• Lack of coherence reg. qual. development
  processes -- only few inst. pursue a systematic
  institutionalised approach to qual. development
• Institutional autonomy systematic approach to
  qd, at least on the extremes

18
Relation of Internal and External QA

• External QA more appreciated in build-up of
  internal QA
• Institutions find that internal qual. processes
  are more improvement oriented and more attuned to
  institutional goals.
• an advanced internal quality culture should
  be mirrored in a light external quality control.

Positive Impact / Effectiveness of External QA
Degree of Advancement of Institutional Qual.
Development
19
Internal Quality Development Teaching,
Learning, Services
Institutional organisation of qd, especially feed
back
Synergies between qual. dev. of different
functions
Instruments (e.g. student questionnaires,
discussion on curricula in committees)
Institutional Autonomy ? External QA
Processes? National Quality (Dis-) Incentives?
20
Internal Quality Development Research
Internal incentives salary, promotion, res. funds
Recruitment and re-election
Peer review of research units
IndividualsSubmission of papers and grant
proposals
21
Impact of Bologna Reforms on Research and
Research Training

• Impact of new programmes on research exposure at
  the different levels
• Impact of new structures and reinforced focus on
  teaching quality on research training at doctoral
  level
• Impact of strengthened institutional
  communication on internal research cooperation
  interdisciplinary programmes
• Shifting time resources from research to teaching
  (teaching more time intensive, not compensated)

22
Research Exposure

• Most institutions offer some res. exposure to
  Bachelor students, but often only limited, dep.
  on subj. Area
• Often concentrated on the last year of long
  degree
• Shift of research experience from Bachelor to
  Master level
• 3 years of Ba-programmes regarded as too short
  for appropriate res. experience Master level
  primary level for research in action (although
  some more professional)
• Often less time for independent research in new
  programmes due to compressed continuously
  assessed programmes
• Research skills of working population if Bachelor
  dominant degree?

23
Research Training at Doctoral Level

• Too early to judge impact
• Many reform plans reg. doctoral training
  (majority)
• Quality of supervision (student log books, doct.
  committees)
• Embedding doctoral research in wider contexts
  such as doctoral schools and graduate schools
  (interdisciplinary, social integration, critical
  mass, synergies reg. additional offer, career
  networking)
• Wider perspectives for research careers (skills
  training, intersectoral mobility)
• Generally little attention to doctoral
  researchers careers and dominant focus on
  academic career (by PhD cand. / acad.), also
  reflected in skills training
• Plea for more transparency but maximum degree of
  flexibility and focus on individual researchers
  needs widen the angle, enhance quality but
  dont overregulate

24
Strengthening the Institutional Level

• Noticeable impact of Bologna reforms on
  institutional communication, new bridges between
  units
• Some institutions used Bologna as part of their
  positioning, but rarely in relation to research
  strengths (only a minority had identified
  strategic res. priorities at institutional level
  in relation to intern. markets)
• Research and education are separately managed at
  most institutions, development comes together at
  level of individual/ department but not of
  institution
• Scepticism regarding idea of research priorities
  in terms of overarching themes

25
Resources for Education vs.Resources for
Research ?!

• Enormous time investment for Bologna reforms,
  esp. if used as opportunity for deeper reform
• Even in the long run, greater time investment
  bec. Of more counselling, tutoring, assessments,
  individualised attention
• Vast majority of institutions were not in a
  position to hire new staff (no additional
  resources from gvmts)
• Research resources particularly problematic in
  some countries, many Eastern European countries,
  Italy, Greece
• T (r) T (e) C per person. Note that few
  univ. were in a position to hire additional
  staff. Universities Enhancing the quality of
  teaching in Europe should not have to be paid
  with a decrease in the quality of research!

26
Implementing BolognaSuccess Factors

• Success factors
• Other ongoing reforms
• Problem awareness
• Institutional communication between units and
  leadership
• Open dialogue with external stakeholders
• Dialogue and willingness to include key actors in
  design of reform (institutional / national)
• Timing
• National financial support for Bol. Reform only
  granted in small minority of countries
• Autonomy in half of BP countries can
  institutions decide autonomously over key
  elements of reform (liberal or prescriptive)

• Transforming
• top-down reforms
• into an
• bottom-up agenda of institutional change

27
Institutional Success Factors

• Other ongoing reforms
• in a third of the countries, B. ref. form an
  integral part of a wider review of the entire HE
  system, according to national rectors
  conferences
• Internal Communication (especially horizontal)
• Added value more transparency (also for resource
  distribution), opportunity to develop new
  interdisciplinary programmes at master level,
  better link to research
• Leadership, institutional coordination and
  guidelines
• Timing
• Balance between enough internal deliberation and
  keeping the momentum to move forward
• Two thirds of institutions decided to adopt the
  B. reforms as their own reform agenda

28
National Success Factors

• Institutional autonomy balance between national
  regulation/ coordination and institutional leeway
• Many criticisms of wrong mix of little guidance
  and information but (often rushed) overregulation
• Examples of good practice exist, e.g. in Finland,
  Denmark, Norway, Ireland, Switzerland, some parts
  of Germany
• Not just governments but sometimes accreditation
  bodies can limit the institutional autonomy
  significantly
• National financial support
• Only 6 countries provided support to institutions
  for the implementation of the Bologna reforms
• A few others provided a little incentive money
  for a few projects or funds for national level
  coordination (but none for implementation at
  institutional level)
• The majority did not interpret their commitment
  as having a financial dimension.

29
Bologna Reforms as Systemic Challenges

• Move to student-centred learning in a majority of
  countries
• More compact programmes, more time pressure, more
  assessment, more efficiency, less time for
  independent study?
• Blurring differentiation between universities and
  other HEI
• Employability at Bachelor level, former
  competitive advantage of other HEI new
  definition of differentiating profiles needed
• Retreating State Funding
• Retreating from full funding of the Master level?
• Not paying for move to more individualised
  learning paths?
• Not increasing institutional grants paying for
  quality enhancement of teaching out of research
  resources

30
Conclusion

• HEI have adopted the Bologna reforms and accepted
  ownership in a majority of cases. The reforms
  have revealed and in some cases even strengthened
  the institutions capacity for change.
• According to HEIs, the Bologna Reforms have
  already brought a considerable array of added
  values and multiple opportunities for enhancing
  the quality of HE in Europe.
• But, if seen in the light of its aims of
  enhancing the quality, attractiveness and
  competitiveness of HE in Europe, many
  opportunities for improvements are still waiting
  to be used, often on hold for lack of available
  resources.
• Many institutions are ready to move forward and
  have identified priorities for change. Some
  national contexts are providing very good
  conditions to help them along.
• How can we push for such conditions to spread to
  more regions in Europe? Or will we have to accept
  a EHEA or ERA with very unequal opportunities for
  institutional development of excellence, even in
  the longer term?