PRESENTATION OF PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF THE TUNING PROJECT

1. PRESENTATION OF PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF THE TUNING PROJECT WELCOME TO THE LE:NOTRE Workshop Kassel Presenter Terry Mitchell (University of Dortmund) e-mail: mitchell@chemie.uni-dortmund.de

2. The Tuning Logo • Background: European Blue • Tuning fork – tuning structures • University – Universal – Union • Open-ended, co-ordinated, flexible U • Diverse, multi-coloured, dynamic

3. TUNING MOTTO Tuning of educational structures and programmes on the basis of diversity and autonomy A project carried out by and for universities An open call: universities respond to the Bologna challenge

4. WHY TUNING? • To implement the Bologna - Prague - Berlin process at university level • To find ways to implement two cycles • To identify common reference points from discipline and university perspective

5. Tuning seeks to: • “Tune” educational structures in Europe • Open up a debate • Identify and exchange information • Improve European co-operation and collaboration in the development of quality, effectiveness and transparency

6. Tuning does not seek to: • develop any sort of unified, prescriptive, or definitive European curricula • create any rigid set of subject specifications • restrict or direct educational content • end the rich diversity of European higher education • restrict independence of academics and subject specialists • damage local and national autonomy

7. Conclusions • Universities have taken their full responsibility in the Bologna process by initiating the Tuning project • Tuning shows that groups of academic experts working in a European context can establish reference points for the two cycles in their subject areas • Common reference points can be identified using an approach based on subject related and generic competences • The application of Tuning techniques can be vital for the creation of the European higher education area • A process of adjusting to Bologna indications is under way: Tuning gives a co-ordinated context for collaboration

8. Recommendations • European higher education institutions should agree on a common terminology and develop a set of methodologies for convergence at the disciplinary and interdisciplinary level • Competences (both subject-related and generic) should be central when designing educational programmes. • A framework based on a common understanding of the European credit system should be adopted. • A common approach to the length of studies within the Bologna two-cycle system is essential • The results of Tuning should be discussed broadly and if possible elaborated and extended by all stakeholders

9. Action lines • Line 1 Academic and generic competences • Line 2 Subject specific competences (knowledge and skills) • Line 3 ECTS as a credit accumulation system • Line 4 Approaches to teaching, learning and assessment

10. Why Line 1? Why Focus on competences? 1. A learner oriented approach to education 2. The need for quality and enhancement of employability and citizenship 3. The creation of the European Higher Education Area

11. Procedure of sample selection - Graduates - Employers - Academics RESPONDENTS ... University 1 University 2 University 3 University 100 University 101 Respondents Respondents Respondents Respondents Respondents ... Methodology and Results Cluster sampling: FINAL SAMPLE

12. Data 7 Areas & 101 university depart. & 16 Countries • Business • Geology • History • Mathematics • Physics • Education • Chemistry • Austria • Belgium • Denmark • Finland • France • Germany • Greece • Iceland • Ireland • Italy • Netherlands • Norway • Portugal • Spain • Sweden • United Kingdon • Total number of respondents: • 5183 Graduates • 944 Employers • 998 Academics

13. Graduates Employers Graduates&Employers Ranking Ranking 1st 2nd ... 1st 2nd ... 1st 2nd ... Combined Ranking Highly correlated rankings (Spearman correlation = 0.89) Results Comparing Graduates and Employers Ranking Importance of Competences

14. Results Comparing Graduates and Employers Graduates Employers Ranking Ranking 1st 2nd ... 1st 2nd ... Ranking Importance of Competences Highly correlated rankings (Spearman correlation = 0.89)

15. 6 • Capacity for organisation • and planning 5 • Teamwork 4 • Ability to work autonomously 4 • Information management skills 3 • Concern for quality 3 • Capacity to adapt to new situations 2 • Capacity for applying knowledge in practice 1 Problem solving 1 • Capacity to learn 1 • Capacity for analysis and synthesis Results Combined ranking: First ten competences Comparing Graduates and Employers Instrumental Interpersonal Systemic

16. 18 Understanding of cultures and customs of other countries 17 Appreciation of diversity and multiculturality 16 Ability to work in an international context Results Comparing Graduates and Employers Combined ranking: Last three competences Instrumental Interpersonal Systemic

17. Ethical commitment Higher for employers Ability to work in interdisciplinary team Initiative and entrepreneurial spirit Teamwork Ability to work autonomously Elementary computing skills Higher for graduates Research skills Capacity for organisation and planning Results Comparing Graduates and Employers How important is...

18. Results Academics Graduates Academics Employers Ranking Ranking Ranking 1st 2nd ... 1st 2nd ... 1st 2nd ... Ranking Competences Correlation 0.46 Correlation 0.54 The Academics ranking is not as similar to Employers and Graduates as it was between Graduates and Employers MOST RELEVANT DIFFERENCES

19. Graduates Academics Employers Ranking Ranking Ranking 4th. Interpersonal Skills 6th. Interpersonal Skills 12th. Basic General Knowledge 12th. Basic General Knowledge Results Academics 1st. Basic General Knowledge 4th. Computing Skills Ranking Competences 14th. Interpersonal Skills 16th. Computing Skills

20. Results Respondent Country Institution Level 3 Level 1 Level 2 Multilevel modelling ? How different are countries? What is the effect of country level? COUNTRY EFFECT: GRADUATES, IMPORTANCE ITEMS

21. Results: Country effect Knowledge of a second language Ability to work autonomously STRONG Will to succeed Capacity for applying knowledge in practice Concern for quality Initiative and entrepreneurial spirit Ability to work in an interdisciplinary team REMAINING 23 ITEMS 30 items MILD & NO EFFECT

22. Line 2: Subject Related Competences

23. Line 2: Subject Related Competences -Introduction Development of the subject area work groups • Phase 1: Informing • Phase 2: Storming • Phase 3: Norming • Phase 4: Performing • Cross-fertilisation • Other subject area groups • synergy groups • plenary sessions • ......from the platforms of academics from EU MS

24. Chemistry

25. The Chemistry Eurobachelor Framework • The proposal deals with the following aspects: • Outcomes Subject Knowledge Abilities and Skills • Content • Credit Distribution • ECTS and Student Workload • Methods of Teaching and Learning • Assessment Procedures and Performance Criteria • Grading • Diploma Supplement

26. The decoupling point inchemistry programmes decoupling point First Cycle Second Cycle Input Needs Wide knowledge and skills basis Defined core outcomes ”Eurobachelor” framework Specialisation Heavy emphasis on research Structure very flexible Little necessity for defining ”common ground”

27. Academics’ perception of subjectimportance at first and second cycle

28. Conclusions

29. Line 2: Subject Related Competences -General Conclusions • Obviously there is • a great willingness and openness of academics to exchange their views on subject related competences and skills within their subject area • a significant common line of understanding • an identifiable common anxiety as regards external pressure to harmonise contents of subject areas • a clear orientation from subject input towards learning outcomes in the design of study-programmes • an identifiable acceptance of the need of a quality assurance system

30. Line 2: Subject Related Competences -Specific Conclusions • Diversity between the groups • Common framework appears to be acceptable as regards first-cycle programmes. Identification of • a common core (Mathematics, Business) • a common study programme (Chemistry, Physics, Business) • subject areas which appear to be different but are in fact very similar(Education, Physics) • learning outcomes(Geology, History)

31. Line 2: Subject Related Competences -Specific Conclusions • A common framework in second-cycle programmes appears to be counter-productive • This does not exclude • formation of partnerships or strategic alliances as at first cycle level

32. Line 2: Subject Related Competences -Specific Conclusions • Within the disciplines subjects can be clustered • knowledge acquisition and widening • knowledge acquisition and deepening • knowledge opening and transfer (support, organisation and communication and transfer skills and competences) • TUNING has emphasised the latter: • Without it knowledge acquisition is useless.

33. Line 2: Subject Related Competences -Specific Conclusions • By focusing on the output (learning outcomes) • the necessary road map has to be identified (syllabus) and • the requirements specified for those who want to enter the programme (input) • And linking this to ECTS, mobility and access across borders, in local, regional and international terms and in the sense of lifelong-learning become a reality

34. Line 2: Subject Related Competences -Specific Conclusions • TUNING proved that • clear objectives in education can be achieved within a limited period of time if an adequate platform is installed • such platforms at European level are a critical success factor in giving academics the opportunity to • exchange views • discuss upcoming issues • constantly update what is common, diverse and dynamic

35. Line 2: Subject Related Competences -Specific Conclusions • Only by relating knowledge and subject related competences to profiles of academic degrees and to those of professions can transparency be created and coherence identified across Europe

36. Line 3 ECTS as an Accumulation System

37. Two perspectives on a credit accumulation (and transfer) system: • Macro: the principles • Micro: in practice(structures, learning outcomes, workload)

38. ‘An effective pan-European credit accumulation and transfer system requires a set of common principles and approaches to credits.’ • ‘The more details that are provided about the nature, context and level of credits, the more useful they become as a common currency for educational recognition, and as a vital element in the creation of the European Higher Education Area.’ PRINCIPLES PAPERPan European Credit Accumulation Framework- Good Practice Guidelines - • INTRODUCTION – Rationale (paradigm shift) • AIMS – What it must achieve • NATURE – A multi purpose framework • CREDITS – What are they? • CREDITS AND LEVELS – The significance of levels • CREDITS AND QUALITY ASSURANCE – Links • CONCLUSIONS ….

39. LINE 3:THE MICRO PERSPECTIVE: • Educational Structures • Learning outcomes / competences • A European Credit Accumulation and Transfer System • Workload

40. ECTS as an Accumulation System EDUCATIONAL STRUCTURES Objective: Comparison in Higher Education • Requires comparability in: • systems • structures • content of studies • Tools to accommodate the objective: • definition of learning outcomes / competences • a credit transfer and accumulation system

41. ECTS as an Accumulation System PARTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES National Authorities: Higher Educational Systems Accreditation TUNING Universities: Higher Educational Structures Faculties/Departments: Content of Studies Quality Assur. and Assessm.

42. ECTS as an Accumulation System EDUCATIONAL STRUCTURES Objective: Comparison in Higher Education • Possible obstacles: • differences in the regular teaching and learning periods (including examination periods) per academic year in Europe • differences in structures and recognised degrees / qualification in a European setting • differences in the length of higher educationstudies to be unbridgeable or incomparable: • first cycle degree: 180 to 240 credits (range 3 to 4) • second cycle degree: 90 to 120 credits (range 1.5 to 2)

43. ECTS as an Accumulation System LEARNING OUTCOMES / COMPETENCES • Comparability and competitivenessrequires transparent learning outcomes / competences (besides a credit system) • Credits as such are an insufficient indication for the (level of) learning achievements • The definition of learning outcomes / competences is a responsibility of the academic staff • On the basis of defined learning outcomes, credits are an important tool for designing curricula • Different pathways can lead to comparable learning outcomes, which allows the diversity in Europe to be fully maintained • Credit accumulation and transfer isfacilitatedby clearly defined learning outcomes

44. ECTS as an Accumulation System A EUROPEAN CREDIT ACCUMULATION AND TRANSFER SYSTEM • European higher education requires one credit system: ECTS • A Europe-wide accumulation and transfer system is an essential tool for more flexible kinds of higher education: part-time studies, lifelong learning • As part of ECTS it is necessary to developa system of level indicators and course type descriptors • In an officially accepted transfer and accumulation system credits no longer have relative value but they have absolute value

45. ECTS as an Accumulation System A EUROPEAN CREDIT ACCUMULATION AND TRANSFER SYSTEM CREDITS • 60 ECTS credits measures the workload of a typical student during one academic year (nine months) • A full calendar year programme (12 months programme of teaching, learning and examinations) can have a maximum load of 75 credits (which equals 46-50 weeks) • Credits allow calculation of the necessary workload and impose a realistic limit on what is possible in a programme or course. • Credits are not interchangeable automatically from one context to another.

46. ECTS as an Accumulation System ECTS AND WORKLOAD • Calculation of workload in terms of credits is to a large extent discipline related, and is determined always by academic staff • Workload and notional learning time are closely related • The notional learning time of a student is influenced by many elements, such as: • diversity of traditions • curriculum design and context • coherence of the curriculum • teaching and learning methods • methods of assessment and performance • organisation of teaching • ability and diligence of the student • financial support from public and private funds

47. Websites www.relint.deusto.es/TuningProject/index.htm www.let.rug.nl/TuningProject/index.htm