1 / 15

Modernizing University Governance in Europe: Bologna Process Challenges

Explore the challenges and priorities of the Bologna Process with a focus on modernizing university governance in a fast-changing world, featuring key seminars and ministerial agreements.

addo
Download Presentation

Modernizing University Governance in Europe: Bologna Process Challenges

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Workshop for Developing a Prototype Statute for Universities in Bosnia and HerzegovinaSarajevo, October 28, 2004MODERNIZING THE GOVERNANCE OF UNIVERSITIES:CHALLENGES OF THE BOLOGNA PROCESS Pavel Zgaga University of Ljubljana

  2. Introductory Thesis Modernizing the university governance- A necessity in the fast changing world • Broadening access to higher education • Progressing “knowledge society” • Mobility, Cooperation, Competition • Internationalization of higher education A need for an open forum where governments, universities, students and other stakeholders can meet: the Bologna process

  3. 1.0 Towards EHEA in 2010 Bologna process (BP) towards the establishing of a common European Higher Education Area (EHEA) by 2010. Levels of implementation - international / European - national (regional) - institutional Structures and actions - BFUG: governments, HE institutions, students, partners - Steering the BP: BFUG, its Board and working groups - official Bologna follow-up seminars

  4. 1.1 Official Bologna follow-up seminars “Joint degrees – Further development” (Sweden, May 2004) ”Bologna and the challenges of e-Learning/distance education” (Belgium, June 2004) “Using Learning Outcomes” (UK, July 2004) “Assessment and accreditation in the European framework” (Spain, July 2004) “Public Responsibility for HE and Research” (CoE, Sept 2004) “Mobility” (The Netherlands, Oct 2004) “Employability and its link to the BP” (Slovenia, Oct 2004) “New Generations of Laws for Higher Education” (Cepes, Nov 2004) “Bachelor’s Degree: What is it?” (Russia, Nov 2004) “Improving the Recognition System” (Latvia, Dec 2004) “European Qualifications Framework” (Denmark, Jan 2005) “The social dimension of HE facing world-wide competition” (France, Jan 2005) “Doc Programmes for the European Knowledge Society” (Austria, Feb 2005) “Co-operation between accreditation agencies” (Poland, Feb 2005)

  5. 2.0 Priorities 2003-2004 “Ministers charge the Follow-up Group with organising a stocktaking process in time for their summit in 2005 and undertaking to prepare detailed reports on the progress and implementation of the intermediate priorities set for the next two years: - quality assurance, - two-cycle system, - recognition of degrees and periods of studies.” Berlin Communiqué, 2003

  6. 3.1 Quality Assurance (QA) Ministerial agreement from Berlin: “Therefore, they agree that by 2005 national quality assurance systems should include: - A definition of the responsibilities of the bodies and institutions involved. - Evaluation of programmes or institutions, including internal assessment, external review, participation of students and the publication of results. - A system of accreditation, certification or comparable procedures. - International participation, co-operation and networking.” Berlin Communiqué, 2003

  7. 3.2 QA: Ministerial call upon from Berlin “At the European level, Ministers call upon ENQA through its members, in co-operation with the EUA, EURASHE and ESIB, to develop an agreed set of standards, procedures and guidelines on quality assurance, to explore ways of ensuring an adequate peer review system for quality assurance and/or accreditation agencies or bodies, and to report back through the Follow-up Group to Ministers in 2005. Due account will be taken of the expertise of other quality assurance associations and network.” Berlin Communiqué, 2003

  8. 3.3 QA: what has been done so far - Quadripartite group (E4) was set up: ENQUA, EUA, EURASHE and ESIB - Draft documents had been presented in the Group and feedback received; some proposals: : institutions carry out internal quality assurance; external review carried out by agencies : cyclical review of (accreditation) agencies at the national or regional level : general standards important, but should not reduce the freedom to be innovative : a committee with a consultative and advisory role : European register of quality assurance agencies : the subsidiarity principle: the division between the national and the European level : institutions to be free to chose an accreditation agency anywhere in Europe

  9. 3.4 QA: Five elements Altogether five elements could be emphasised: 1. The importance of internal quality assurance. 2. The use of an agreed or common set of standards in the context of the Bologna Process. 3. Creation of a European register or list of trustworthy agencies. 4. Member states should enable HEI to choose between evaluation or accreditation agencies in the register. 5. Consequently, member states should accept that assessments made by agencies on the list may be used as a basis for decisions on licencing, funding, student grants etc. even if the agency is a foreign one. However, a delicate process of cooperation: ''ENQA through its members, in co-operation with the EUA, EURASHE and ESIB’’…

  10. 4.0 Stocktaking A special BFUG working group on stocktaking was set up in spring 2004. Several tasks: • Eurydice: gathering info from 40 countries of BP • The deadline for this part of the process is 31 October 2004 • National contributions to the stocktaking is 14 January 2005 • The EUA and preparation of Trends IV: exercises at the institutional level • National Reports 2005.

  11. 5.0 Overarching Qualifications Framework The QF working group has already finished most of its work. Bologna seminar in Copenhagen on 13-14 January 2005. • The framework for the EHEA is not a framework for qualifications in Europe, but a framework for frameworks. • It will not be regulatory, but provide a set of reference points to facilitate movement between countries. • The proposal provides for three principal levels, corresponding to the degree cycles agreed on in the Bologna Process, with descriptors developed by the Joint Quality Initiative. • It also refers to short-cycle education: proposal for a single level with a single descriptor for short-cycle programmes. • Credits will be part of the overarching framework. • Recommendation that the ECTS system is developed further.

  12. 6.0 Evaluation of the Process New applications open the problem of evaluation – future as well as present members. Even more important since we are approaching 2010 – from a process to a goal. Besides the well-known “Bologna goals”, the principles underpinning the Bologna Process as follows:  Mobility of students and staff;  Autonomous universities;  Student participation in the governance of higher education;  Public responsibility for higher education;  The importance of the social dimension of the BP.

  13. 6.1 Elements of the National Reports 2005 1. Main achievements since Berlin 2. National organisation 3. Quality assurance 4. The two-cycle system 5. Recognition of degrees and periods of studies 6. Doctoral studies 7. Mobility of students and staff 8. The social dimension of higher education 9. Developments in lifelong learning 10. Contribution to the European dimension in higher education 11. Promoting the attractiveness of the EHEA 12. Concluding comments

  14. 7.0 Bergen Conference: plans and expectations Three main content elements: • progress since Berlin (and since Bologna): stocktaking, quality assurance and qualifications frameworks; • possible intermediate goals for 2007: a few priority areas selected where concrete targets can be formulated; • goals for 2010; To what extent can they be set?

  15. 7.2 Bergen Conference: intermediate goals 2007 Issues to be addressed as intermediate goals for 2007: 1. Making operational the Bergen conclusions on existing priorities 2. A shortlist of important priorities for the coming period: : wider application of the ECTS credit system : reduction of barriers to joint degrees; promotion of mobility, : the third cycle and the synergies between the EHEA and ERA, : life-long learning : the European dimension : the social dimension... 3. Implementation strategy: the process has reached an important crossroads; efforts should be stimulated especially at the institutional level.

More Related