1' TECHNO TN MEETING Brussels, February 13th14th 2004

1
1. TECHNO TN MEETINGBrussels, February
13th-14th 2004

• Engineering Education and the Bologna Process
  The/An academic point of view
• Günter HeitmannTechnical University Berlin, TN
  E4

2
1.  Bologna Process The Aims and Tools
2.  Disadvantages and Challenges 3.
Positions from the Universities and Colleges
in charge of Engineering Education and
Research 4. Experiences from the
Implementation and Problems to be
solved5.  Contributions of the Thematic
Networks to the Bologna Process
3
1. The Bologna process and its central aims

• Development of a common European Higher Education
  Area in order to
• support convergence and comparability, in due
  course recognise diversity as a European value
  and strive for transparency,
• facilitate academic and professional mobility as
  a contribution to quality,
• promote internationalisation and global
  competitiveness,
• raise quality and contribute to economic growth,
• enhance the European Integration, maintain
  cultural heritage and wealth.

4
Conflicting aims- Unity in diversity or
Diversity as Europes wealth- Convergence
Harmonisation facilitates recognition and
mobility
5
Bologna The 6 objectives (1999)1) Adoption of
a system of easily readable and comparable
degrees2) Adoption of a system essentially based
on two main cycles3) Establishment of a
credit system4) Promotion of mobility5)
Promotion of European cooperation in quality
assurance6) Promotion of the European
dimension in HE
6
PRAGUE COMMUNIQUE (2001)7) Life Long
Learning as an essential element of the
EHEA8) Active involvement of Higher
Education Institutions and the Students9)
Promoting the Attractiveness of the European
Higher Education Area
7
BERLIN COMMUNIQUE (2003)10) Doctoral Level as
the third cycle in the Bologna Process11)
Closer links between EHEA and the European
Research AreaIn addition priorities in the next
2 years quality assurance, two-cycle system,
recognition issuesacceleration of
implementation, stock taking
8
2. Disadvantages and Challenges

• Bologna started as politically driven, top down
  process with minor involvement of the Higher
  Education Institutions,
• The envisaged consecutive structure was
  contradictionary to traditional continental
  European structures and experience,
• The Bologna Process functions as a frame not for
  European Integration but for different national
  interests

9
Main Challenge The two cycles

• No qualitative denominators like level
  descriptors or degree standards, but formal ones
  like credits
• no distinction of profiles,
• no discipline or subject specific
  differentiations,
• no recognition of different entry levels and /or
  selectivity,
• different traditions not taken into account.
• Results so far Increased diversity, mobility
  reduced, employability of graduates and
  professional recognition of first degree partly
  uncertain, quality development threatened

10
Other Challenges

• Implementation of new Quality Assurance Systems,
  in particular Accreditation,
• ECTS Credits and Modularisation,
• Ensuring Attractivity and Comparability,
• Quality and Employability

11
3. Positions of the Engineering Education
Community The Helsinki Communication of
CESAER/SEFI

• keep integrated programmes to a second cycle
  master level in addition to consecutive ones
• develop multiple profiles, specific qualities of
  the existing, application-oriented first cycle
  degrees must be safe-guarded with bridges to
  second cycle programmes being provided
• dont stick to ECTS as the only degree
  denominator criteria for degrees in engineering
  should be based on learning outcomes and on
  competence rather than on student workload
• respect and support the autonomy of Universities
  and allow special profiling and selectivity.

12
No regulation of the doctorate!

• Improve links to the European Research Area but
  dont regulate the doctorate programmes and
  degrees,
• Promote transnational networks, also in the field
  of doctorates, for improvement of quality,
  mobility, global international attractiveness and
  competitiveness.

13
(No Transcript)
14
4. Results and Experiences from the
Implementation Process

• General observations Trend 3 Report
• Experiences from Germany

15
  Cycles and levels Bachelors

• (Red 180 ECTS Bachelors, White 240 ECTS
  Bachelors)
•  
• Traditional United Kingdom, Ireland, Malta
• Established Iceland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark,
  Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Turkey
• In Consolidation Czech Rep., Slovak Rep.,
  Finland, Bulgaria, Poland, Portugal, Cyprus
• Newly introduced Netherlands, Italy, Germany,
  Austria, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Belgium,
  France, Spain, Hungary
• Separate tracks Romania, Greece, Croatia,
  Slovenia

16
Cycles and Levels Master Degrees of 60-120 ECTS
credits

• Austria, Belgium-Fl, (Belgium-Wa), Bulgaria,
  Cyprus, Czech Rep., Denmark, Estonia, Finland,
  France, Germany, (Greece), Hungary, Iceland,
  Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Malta,
  Netherland, Norway, Poland, (Portugal), Romania,
  Slovakia, Sweden, Switzerland, UK

17
Bologna process a success story ?

• In many ways and superficially yes,
• with regard to various aims not or not yet e.g.
  comparability and transparency not achieved to
  the necessary amount, horizontal mobility
  obviously reduced, problems with professional
  recognition and employability,
• One reason The implementation is still
  primarily driven by strong national political,
  but also institutional interests

18
Transnational Transparency
of Qualification profiles
BA / MA at some Universities today
- P Milano (I) BA (3) MA (2)
- ECP (F) 23 (traditional GE-System)
- TU Delft (NL) virtual bachelor
- Imperial C (UK) MEng replaced BA
- RWTH (D) long cycle Dipl.-Ing., also short
master
Werner Weber. RHTW Aachen

19
Problems and reasons influencing the
implementation process

• Continuously strong national interests, solutions
  and strategies
• Uncertainties among students and employers
• Influence of institutional interests
• Lack of commonly agreed quality standards
• Diversity in legal frames
• Role of resources and funding

20
Germany as an example

• Started with Bachelor/Master 1998 before Bologna
  in order to increase international attractiveness
• Government first wanted to keep the binary
  structure of Universities and Fachhochschulen in
  connection with the consecutive structure
• But permitted Fachhochschulen to introduce the
  same degrees as the Universities
• Started with the Bachelor/Master Programmes as a
  complementary system to tradional Degrees
  (Dipl-Ing., Magister, State Examinations) and
  continues to do so
• Government hopes for positive results in terms of
  reduced funding

21
Germany as an example

• Universities and Fachhochschulen are still
  reluctant to replace the old system of integrated
  programmes but offer a wide range of additional
  programmes with bachelor/master degrees
• The figures
• Out of 9355 undergraduate programmes 1517 (16.2
  ) are in engineering
• Out of 951 programmes at Fachhochschulen only
  157 are bachelor degrees (16.5 ), out of 550 at
  University only 89 (16,2 ) finish with a
  bachelor degree
• Regarding post-graduate programmes From 1.811 in
  total 387 (21,4 )are in engineering, 173 at
  Fachhochschulen (156 / 40,3 Master Degree
  Level),
• 210 at Technical Universities (150/ 38,8 Master
  of Science Degrees)

22
5. Contributions of the TN Problems to be solved

• Qualitative Parameters needed in order to develop
  and describe European degrees in engineering
  e.g. level descriptors, common cores, intended
  learning outcomes in terms of competences,
  outcomes oriented accreditation standards
• Facilitation of mobility and academic recognition
  e.g. by improving the ECTS, developing
  transparency of programmes and courses/modules,
  increasing transnational joint programmes and
  transparent quality assurance

23
Contributions of the TN Professional recognition

• Contributions to professional recognition by
  developing globally recognized quality labels on
  all degree levels, but namely the first degree,
  respective accreditation standards and procedures
  and continuous quality assurance organize active
  involvement in the development of a European
  Qualifications Framework and the specification of
  Dublin Descriptors
• Cooperate in developing ESOEPE

24
Contributions of the TN Curriculum Development

• Promote and introduce curriculum development and
  revision approaches which start from clear
  profile specifications and respective learning
  objectives and intended outcomes, provide
  arrangements for active and problem-based
  learning and apply an appropriate system of
  outcomes assessment
• Develop transnational and joint European
  programmes in innovative subject areas with
  strong links to research and industry

25
ABET - Evaluation Assessment Cycles 2-loop
Process
Determine educational objectives
Evaluate Objectives
Input from Constituencies
26
The Joint Quality Initiative Descriptors

• Masters graduates
• can apply their knowledge and understanding, and
  problem solving abilities in new or unfamiliar
  environments within broader contexts
• have the ability to integrate knowledge and
  handle complexity, and formulate judgements with
  incomplete or limited information, but that
  include reflecting on social and ethical
  responsibilities linked to the application of
  their knowledge and judgements
• can communicate their conclusions, and the
  knowledge and rationale underpinning these, to
  specialists and non-specialist audiences clearly
  and unambiguously
• have the learning skills to allow them to
  continue to study in a manner that may be largely
  self-directed or autonomous.

27
Quality AssuranceCriteria for Programmes

• Goals for core competences are clear and
  realistic
• Goals are developed considering the needs of the
  labour market
• Goals include development of generic skills
• Content is consistent with goals
• Subject related competences are achieved through
  compulsory subjects
• Programme characterised by progression
• Assessments enable learners to demonstrate
  achievement of learning outcomes

28
ABETProgram Outcomes (a - k)
29
Join us at E4 Dissemination Conference at TU
Berlin, May 7th and 8th, 2004

• Innovations in Engineering Education
• Challenges, Concepts and Good Practice
• guenter.heitmann_at_tu-berlin.de
• http//www.tu-berlin.de/fb2/TUB_E4_Colloquium