THE BOLOGNA PROCESS – ITS IMPACT IN EUROPE AND BEYOND Jolanta Urbanikowa Edulab – Budapest,...

THE BOLOGNA PROCESS – ITS IMPACT IN EUROPE AND BEYOND

Jolanta UrbanikowaEdulab – Budapest, 3-4.XII.2015

The overall pictureOf the state of national implementation of Bologna action lines and commitments in several policy areas reveals that the Bologna Process has brought about fundamental and dramatic change in signatory countries…. The need to intensify cooperation at the European level is becoming ever more acute, and improved monitoring mechanisms are essential to assess the impact of ongoing reforms.

David Crosier&Teodora Parveva,

The Bologna Proces: its impact in Europe and beyond, Paris 2013

Vision has come true• EHEA, 47 countries with different political, cultural

and academic traditions – cooperate on the basis of open dialogue and shared

goals and common committments– enagaged in a process of volunatry covenrgence

and coordinated reform of HE systems– this is based on public responsibility for HE,

academic freedom, institutional autonomy, and commitment to integrity

– It relies on strong public funding, implemented through common degree structure, a shared understanding of principleas and processes for QA and recognition, and common tools.

Progress has been made• in enabling students and graduates to move within the

EHEA with recognition of their qualifications and periods of study

• study programmes provide graduates with knowledge, skills and competences either to contionue their studies or to enter the European labour market

• institutions are becoming increasingly active in interbnational context

• academics cooperate in joint teaching and research programmes

• the EHEA has opened a dialogue with other regions of the world and is considered a model of structured cooperation

Serious challenges• EHEA is confronted with continuing economic and

scoail crisis, dramatic levels of unemployment, increasing marginalisation of young people, demographic changes, new migration patterns, and conflicts within and between countries, as well as extremism and radicalisation

EHEA has a key role• To play in addressing these chellenges and maximising

these opportunities through European collaboration and exchange, by pursuing common goals and in dialogue with partners around the globe.

WE MUST RENEW OUR ORIGINAL VISION AND CONSOLIDATE THE EHEA STRUCTURE

A renewed visionBy 2020 we are determined to achieve an EHEA where our common goals are implemented in all member countries to ensure trust in each other’s HE systems; where automatic recognition of qualifications has become a reality so that students and graduates can move easily throughout it; where HE is contributing effectively to build inclusive societies, founded on democratic values and human rights; and where educational opportunities provide the competences and skills required for Europena citizens, innovation and employment…

We will pursue these goals:• Enhancing the quality and relevance of learning and

teaching• Fostering the employability of graduates throughout

their working lives• Making our systems more inclusive• Implementing agreed structural reforms

Lessons learned• The original European vision was not well communicated• A clear distinction was not made between the two main levels

of implementation: the national and the institutional level• Student-centred learning was not always clearly recognised• 47 countries – implication of tensions between different

aspects of convergence process– A pan-European approach v. national diversity– Process v. outcome– Top-down v. bottom-up approach– Common standards v. flexibility– Cooperation v. competition– Global v. regional

Automatic Recognition of Qualifications

(LRC)

TRUST

QUALITY

COOPERATION

BOLOGNA PROCESS

IMPACT

EHEA

IMPACT

Automatic recognition• Ministers committed themselves to AR in Bucharest

Communique 2012

Automatic recognition of a degree should lead to the automatic right of an applicant holding a qualification of a certain level to be considered for entry to a programme of further study in the next level in any other EHEA-country (access not admission – cf.LRC)• PfG confirmed that AR is possible• Recommendations:

For EHEA Ministers• To ensure that qualifications from other EHEA

countries are recognised on an equal level with domestic qualifications, for ezample through enacting specific legislation to achieve this objective

Smaller steps• To review national legislation which obliges to look at

formal and quantifiable criteria first• To advise credential evaluators in HEIs on properly

implementing LRC• To endorse EAR-HEI Manual• To ensure a 4-months maximum time limit for recognition

process• To use modern technologies and expertise of ENIC-NARIC• To implement a system of appeals to recognition decisions• To support the QA assessing recognition processes• To increase the role of Diploma Supplement• To explore the potential for AR on a regional basis

ESU

Time to Meet the Expectations from 1999

• The main obstacle for reaching the goals of the EHEA is the lack of a minimum level of implementation of the Bologna reforms.

• This lack of implementation raises extreme concerns and fosters a lack of confidence in the Process among students, as after more than 15 years, the goals of the Bologna Declaration remain largely unfulfilled.

Time to Meet the Expectations from 1999• It is still far from achieving a fully functional EHEA• Automatic recognition is yet to become reality• DS. is still not granted for free and automatically• Recognition procedures complicated and time-

consuming (thus inaccessible)• RPL – rather limited impact• Discrimination of underrepresented groups should be

more holistic

LACK OF FUNDING

LACK OF INTEREST

LACK OF KNOWLEDGE

To be tackled• Student participation• Social dimension• QA• Student-centred learning• Recognition• Student mobility• Internationalisation • Structural reforms• Emplyability• Financing of HE

EUA – TRENDS 2015

Trends seek to answer• To what extent have learning and teaching moved up as

institutional priority; how extensive has the shift been to students-centred learning and is this shift supported by national and institutional policuies and othe measures?

• What are the key changes that have affected institutional developments, particularly in realation to learning and teaching?

• Trends questionnaire results show that universities have responded to challenges in the area of teaching and learning, there is evidence of many initiatives to increase, and widen participation, provide students with opportunities to develop transferable skills and inclyde external stakeholders in core institutional actyivities

Trends seek to answer• The perception of EHEA has improved across

Europe; however Trends 2015 also show that commitment can disappear quickly and positive trends can be reversed by policies that are not fully embraced by the institutions. Gaps between EHEA policy objectives and institutional realities in:– NQF– Joint programmes– Credit recognition an obstacle to mobility– Lack of progresss in legal frameworks allowing

HEIs to choose any QA agency

Trends seek to answerShould be also addressed in future:• LO-based approach• LLL and RPL• SCL• Internationalisation strategies

Effect of EHEAThe beneath should also be addressed:• LLL and RPL• SCL• Effective internationalisation strategies

Usefulness of NQFs

LLL strategies

Learning outcomes

Intl v. enhancement of t&l

EACEA, EURYDICE

NQF - implemenation

LRC - implementation

Beyond Europe

The global dimension• Considerable interest of policy makers and HE in BP• How to respond or how to aling with the reforms• Awareness of its strengths and weaknesses (content and

process) and its relevance• Interest attributed to the idea of harmonisation and

integration of HE systems (regional cooperation, international mobility, recognition of qualificatioons and QA – trust)

Core objectives appealing• Encouraging mobility• Working towards regional cooperation• Transparency of qualifications• Mutual recognition• The need fopr modernised HE systems – to assist

development; to prevent brain drain)

The EHEA at Global setting• London 2007 and later

– Improving information on EHEA– Promoting EHE to increase its worldwide

attractiveness and competitiveness– Strengthening cooperation based on partnership– Intensifying policy dialogue– Furthering recognition of qualifications

Erasmus+ capacity building projectsBased on Alfa, Edu-link and Tempus

Aims:• Support the modernisation, accessibility and

internationalisation of HE in the Partner Countries• Promote cooperation between Programme Countries

and eligible Partner countries• Promote voluntary convergence with EU developments

in HE• Promote people-to-people contcats, intercultural

awareness and understanding

Erasmus+ capacity building projects• Activities:

developing new curricula and improving existing ones• Improving governanace and management systems• Building relationships between HEIs and relevant

socio-economic actorts

Global implications of BP• Asia: Australia – an attempt to establish Asia-Pacific

process – Brisbane Process/Brisbane Communique 2006 (mobility, QA standards, enhanced recognition)– Southeast Asian Ministers of Edu organisation’s

Regional Centre for HE and Development (SEAMEO RIHED) – Thailand – HEA – mobility, QA, credit transfer, reaserch clusters;

• Latin America & the Caribbean: Inter-American Organosation for Higher education – IOHE – to support HEA – quality, credit transfer and accumulation, curricular harmonisation, Framework of qualifications, recognition of academic titles

• Africa: efforts to creat African HEA – qulification recognition,harmoniosation, QA, social dimension

Global implications of BP• North America: HE experts in US and Canada

identified BP elements that could be adapted to national contexts; a wake-up call for HE reform in US; pilot TUNING USA project – harmonsation of curricula; potentially qualifications framework in US and Canada

• North Africa and Middle East: adopted and flexibly implemebnted some of Bologna pronciples and tools – degree structure, credit transfer su=ystem

The key issues of Bologna• Will be of direct relevance to the rest of the world• Progress achieved in recognition of diplomas and

degrees and quality assurance can serve as good practice

• Other reagions can benefit from the experience of the bologna Process by elaborating their own appraches to regional integration without necessarily emulating the Bologna model.

The Case of Poland

Pars pro toto – University of Warsaw• Law on Higher Education 2005, as amended

– Abundance of ministerial decrees and institutional regulations

– PKA – Polish Accreditation Committee –QA agency v. a control body

– Role of academic community accreditation bodies– Lack of due reflection– Credit and degree recognition– Internationalisation v. mobility– Student participation – SCL

• New government: to abandon Bologna Process?

Rate of 30-34 year olds holding higher education qualification (ISCED classification) Eurostat 2015

Thank you for your attention!