The Bologna Process Aims, Objectives and Challenges Elli Georgiadou

1. The Bologna Process Aims, Objectives and Challenges Elli Georgiadou

2. Some useful references • Bologna (2008). Retrieved September 1, 2008 http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/educ/bologna/bologna_en.html • Crosier, D., Purser, L., Smidt, H. (2007). Trends V: Universities Shaping the European Higher Education Area, European University Association, Retrieved September 1, 2008, http://www.eua.be/fileadmin/user_upload/files/Publications/EUA_Trends_V_for_web.pdf • Reichert, S., Tauch, C., 2005. Trends IV: European Universities Implementing Bologna, Executive Summary, European University Association, Retrieved September 1, 2008, http://www.eua.be/eua/jsp/en/upload/TrendsIV_FINAL.1117012084971.pdf • Siakas, K., Georgiadou, E. (2008). Knowledge Sharing in Virtual and Networked Organisations in Different Organisational and National Cultures, (eds.), Ettore Bolisani, Building the Knowledge Society on the Internet, Idea Publishing, ISBN: 978-1-59904-816-1, Part 1, Chapter 3 • ENQA (the European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education) http://www.enqa.eu/ • Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, UK http://www.qaa.ac.uk • Middlesex University (2008/09). Learning and Quality Enhancement Handbook • Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA). Subject Benchmarks (QAA), Gloucester, UK: www.qaa.ac.uk, 2000). • http://tuning.unideusto.org/tuningeu/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=172&Itemid=205 • http://www.polifonia-tn.org/Content.aspx?id=111

3. Outline • Background • An on-going process • Towards an Open European Higher Education Area • Meeting the challenges / changing the culture • Conclusion

4. Background The quality of studies are requirements of • Recognition of studies and qualifications • Common recognition systems of study programs After 1953 different international organisations put emphasis on quality and common recognition system Lately the European Union is trying to create a European Higher Education Area (EHEA)

5. An on-going process • Sorbone (1998) • Lisbon Treaty (2000) • Prague (2001) • Berlin (2003) • Bergen (2005) • London (2007) • Leuven (2009)

6. 47 Countries Signatories to the Bologna Process • Albania Germany Norway • Andorra Greece Poland • Armenia Holy See Portugal • Austria Hungary Romania • Azerbaijan Iceland Russian Federation • BelgiumIreland Serbia • Bosnia-Herzegovina Italy Slovak Republic • BulgariaKazakhstan Slovenia • Croatia Latvia Spain • Cyprus Liechtenstein Sweden • Czech Republic Lithuania Switzerland • Denmark Luxembourg "the former Yugoslav Republicof Macedonia" • Estonia Malta Turkey • Finland Moldova Ukraine • France Montenegro United Kingdom • Georgia Netherlands

7. Additional member • European Commission Consultative members • Council of Europe UNESCO European Centre for Higher Education European University Association • European Association of Institutions in Higher Education • European Students' Union • European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education • Education International Pan-European Structure • BUSINESSEUROPE

8. The Bologna Process Objectives Towards an Open European Higher Education Area • to move Higher Education in Europe towards a more transparent and mutually recognised system • to place the diversified national systems into a common frame • to achieve harmonisation and integration of HE in member states • to establish a coherent and cohesive European Higher Education Area by 2010 • to promote the European system of Higher Education worldwide To increase competitiveness of Europeans in the international labour market and the attractiveness of European Higher Education in the world

9. Framework of Qualifications • National qualifications frameworks are developed to be compatible with the overarching framework of qualifications of the European Higher Education Area, which was adopted in 2005 and consists of three cycles (e.g. bachelor, master, doctorate). The overarching framework makes recognition of qualifications easier since specific qualifications can be related to a common framework.

10. Sorbonne Declaration,1998 A first attempt for creation of a European Higher Education Area (France, Germany, Italy, UK) • Convergence of study programmes • Two cycles of studies • Graduates: Bachelor • Postgraduates: Masters and PhD • Mobility – recognition of degrees Harmonisation of the architecture of the European Higher Education System

11. The Sorbonne declaration of 25th of May 1998 • Stressed the Universities' central role in developing European cultural dimensions • Emphasised the creation of the EUROPEAN HIGHER EDUCATION AREA (EHEA) as a key way to promote • citizens' mobility • employability • the continent's overall development The importance of education and educational co-operation in the development and strengthening of stable, peaceful and democratic societies is universally acknowledged as paramount

12. The Bologna Process • Named after the Bologna Declaration, which was signed in the Italian city of Bologna on 19 June 1999 by ministers in charge of higher education from 29 European countries Today, 46 countries • involves European Commission,Council of Europe and UNESCO-CEPES, as well as representatives of higher education institutions, students, staff and employers

13. The European Commission • the executive branch of the European Union responsible for • proposing legislation • implementing decisions • upholding the Union's treaties • the general day-to-day running of the Union • There is one Commissioner per member state • Commissioners are bound to represent the interests of the EU as a whole rather than their home state http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission

14. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) • United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations established on 16 November 1945 • Its stated purpose is to contribute to peace and security by promoting international collaboration through education, science, and culture in order to further universal respect for justice, the rule of law, and the human rights and fundamental freedoms proclaimed in the UN Charter • UNESCO has 193 Member States and 6 Associate Members http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNESCO

15. UNESCO-CEPES • UNESCO-CEPES was established 1972 at Bucharest, Romania, as a de-centralized office for the European Centre for Higher Education • The centre promotes international cooperation in the sphere of higher education and also serves Canada, the USA and Israel • Higher Education in Europe is the official journal of UNESCO-CEPES http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNESCO-CEPES

16. The Council of Europe • Founded in 1949 • seeks to develop throughout Europe common and democratic principles based on the European Convention on Human Rights and other reference texts on the protection of individuals • 47 member countries http://www.coe.int/T/e/Com/about_coe/

17. What is the Bologna Process? • The Bologna Process is the process of creating the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) • The Bologna Process is based on cooperationbetween ministries, higher education institutions, students and staff from 46 countries, with the participation of international organisations

18. Basic aims of the Bologna Declaration • Mobility • Employability • Competitiveness

19. Increase attractiveness Increase transparency Increase mobility Facilitate recognition Adapt Higher Education to labour market Reform degree system Bologna Process – Main points • Higher Education as a public good and public responsibility • Student participation • Life Long Learning • Quality Assurance

20. Bologna Objectives • Adoption of a system with easy readable and comparable degrees • Adoption of a system based on two main cycles • Undergraduate (Bachelor - BSc) • Graduate (Master – MSc) • Establishment of system of credits - ECTS • Promotion of co-operation in Quality Assurance with a view of developing comparable criteria and methods • Promotion of mobility by overcoming obstacles • Promotion of European Dimension in Higher education

21. An on-going process • Sorbone (1998) • Lisbon Treaty (2000) • Prague (2001) • Berlin (2003) • Bergen (2005) • London (2007) • Leuven (2009)

22. Prague Communiqué, 2001 • Assurance of commitmentto the objectives of the Bologna Process • Active involvement of the • European University Association: EUA • National Union of Students in Europe: ESIB • The help provided by the European Commission was emphasised • Analysis of the Progress towards the Bologna Objective • Important issues were stated • Life-long learning • Student commitment • Support of attractiveness and competitiveness of the European Higher Education Area

23. Berlin (2003) • Ministers encourage the member States to elaborate a framework of comparable and compatible qualifications for their higher education systems, which should seek to describe qualifications in terms of workload, level, learning outcomes, competences and profile • They also undertake to elaborate an overarching framework of qualifications for the European Higher Education Area Quality Assurance First cycle degrees Second cycle degrees Doctoral studies ECTS

24. Berlin 2003 Quality assurance • National quality assurance systems by 2005 with mutually shared criteria and methodologies • 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

25. Berlin 2003 Quality Assurance • The two-cycle system • development of an overarching framework of qualifications; • degrees should have • Different defined outcomes • Different orientations and • Various profiles • for the diversity of • individual • academic and • labour market needs • Recognition of degrees and periods of studies

26. Berlin 2003 Quality Assurance The third cycle include the doctoral level as the third cycle in the Bologna Process and to promote closer links between EHEA and the European Research Area (ERA) 10th action line: Doctoral studies and the synergy between EHEA and ERA

27. Bergen (2005) National Qualifications frameworks • Instruments for • achieving comparability and transparency within the EHEA • facilitating the movement of learners within, as well as between, higher education systems • help HEIs to develop modules and study programmes based on learning outcomes and credits • improve the recognition of qualifications as well as all forms of prior learning

28. Berlin 2003 - Bergen 2005 Communiqués Universities are required to create policies and procedures for quality assurance Creation of A culture of evidence Learning Organisations

29. London (2007) • Some initial progress has been made towards the implementation of national qualifications frameworks, but that much more effort is required • The ministers commit themselves to fully implementing such national qualifications frameworks, certified against the overarching Framework for Qualifications of the EHEA, by 2010

30. Qualifications frameworks In the European Higher Education Area, qualifications frameworks are found at two levels: • An overarching framework adopted in 2005 developed for the EHEA • National qualifications frameworks compatible with the overarching frameworks will be developed by 2010 by all member countries

31. Qualifications frameworks • Encompasses all the qualifications in a higher education system • shows what a learner knows, understands and is able to do on the basis of a given qualification  shows the expected learning outcomes for a given qualification • shows how the various qualifications in the education or higher education system interact  how learners can move between qualifications

32. Qualifications frameworks Focus on • outcomes and • how several learning paths (including lifelong learning) may lead to a given qualification • play an important role in developing • degree systems • study programmes at higher education institutions • facilitate the recognition of qualifications • are important for those who make use of qualifications (learners and employers)

33. Creating the European Higher Education Area • Building on our rich and diverse European cultural heritage, we are developing an EHEA based on • institutional autonomy • academic freedom • equal opportunities and • democratic principles that will facilitate mobility, increase employability and strengthen Europe’s attractiveness and competitiveness Ministers responsible for Higher Education in the countries participating in the Bologna Process, London Communiqué, May 2007

34. The European Higher Education Area aims to • facilitate mobility of students, graduates and higher education staff • prepare students for their future careers and for life as active citizens in democratic societies, and support their personal development • offer broad access to high-quality higher education, based on democratic principles and academic freedom

35. Fundamental principles of the Bologna Process Universities' independence and autonomy ensure that higher education and research systems continuously • adapt to changing needs • society's demands and • advances in scientific knowledge

36. Bologna process • Supranational characteristic • Discussions on acceptability and usefulness of evaluation • Power is moving from academia towards market, government and intergovernmental actors • Two alternatives: • Loyalty to official policy – production of information to support and legitimate status quo • Emphasis can be developmental and aim at change

37. The Bologna process – Quality Assurance • Emphasis external quality assurance in HE • Pressure on signatory countries to establish national quality assurance systems • The whole Bologna process is about conformity and diversity • The evaluation report is often considered to be a key tool leading to utilisation of recommendations and the impacts which might follow

38. Challenges • Achieving the 2010 objectives • In principle everybody can appreciate the expected benefits of an eventual integration but the ‘dream’ of 2010 is proving difficult to be realised. However, achieving harmonisation may be hindred by all those diverse contents, symbols and systems that have been developed throughout history. Progress has been slower than anticipated particularly with the accession of several new member states with diverse quality awareness, culture and practices.

39. Trends IV • The Trends IV Report (Reichert and Tauch, 2005) turns focus from the fact that in Quality Assurance (QA) ”the differences among individual European countries are enormous” to “a clear trend towards more institutional approaches to exploit synergies, economies of scale and spread models of good practice particularly within institutions which enjoy a high degree of autonomy. ” • The essential aim of the Bologna reforms, namely to create a European Higher Education Area, which is predicated on quality and, therefore, it is attractive to its members as well as the outside world, can only be achieved if the concern for quality is not reduced to the establishment or optimisation of external quality assurance processes alone, but considers all processes of institutional development” (Reichert and Tauch, 2005).

40. Trends V • In Trend V (Crosier et. al, 2007) it was reported that various national QA systems, which are “costly and offer no evidence of overall quality improvement” are holding back the Bologna implementation and the demands of the European Knowledge Society. • In addition, feedback and monitoring mechanisms are weak and inconsistent across institutions, and the institutional and governmental resources to provide incentives for implementing change are often missing. T • These problems are exacerbated by the shortage or lack of experts that can carry out evaluations and monitoring. Also, the lack of effective central management and administrative systems make it difficult or impossible to collect and analyse University-wide data.

41. The Bologna process advocates the convergence between European universities regarding technologies and the related pedagogical and organisational approaches themselves, it is important to note that this convergence does not aim to change the mission and strategies of the institutions, but to support them (Siakas, 2007, Siakas & Georgiadou, 2008)

42. Challenges of the Bologna Process QA agencies: • Create academic standards in the Academic Infrastructure • Advise government on applications for degree awarding powers • Disseminate information and experiences • Share best practices in the field of quality assurance (QA) in HE HE Challenges: • Self-assessment • Internal quality reviews • External reviews (including audit) Increased diversity and complexity need to be addressed both at European and local levels

43. Leuven/Louvain-la-Neuve, April 2009 • Took stock of achievements • Greater integration, harmonisation and mobility • Bologna achieved greater compatibility and comparability of the systems of higher education and has made it easier for learners to move between them and for - institutions to attract students and scholars from other continents. • Established the priorities for the European Higher Education Area for the next decade. • Knowledge, innovation, creativity • Aging population • Globalisation • Technological developments (& new providers) • Need to develop competencies • Financial crisis /long term investment in HE

44. Conclusion • Detailed theoretical principles have been provided by the architects of the Bologna process and by subsequent reports of the attempts to implement it, the progress achieved and the many obstacles in this complex and diverse process. • As the target year of 2010 has been reached practical guidelines arising from experience seem necessary in order to avoid pitfalls and facilitate further the implementation process. • For successful development of a Quality Assurance framework and subsequent implementation of any harmonisation (e.g. Bologna process) it is necessary to gain thorough understanding of the European mission and strategic vision and the ways in which education must be re-shaped at local, national and European levels