Download paper - Maastricht University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Maastricht European Studies Papers 2007/07 L. Unbehauen student-centered learning (p. 47). Also my own university, the University of Maastricht, has picked up this new approach by focusing on so-called Problem-Based Learning, which involves a great amount of self-study and extensive group discussions on the learned content. Furthermore, many governments have failed to inform both students and employers on the value and meaning of the bachelor and to restructure their own public service employment practices (p. 15). Both issues are a reason for the only reluctantly growing acceptance of the new degree structures in society. Second, concerning recognition the Diploma Supplement has been implemented by all member countries by 2005. However, due to technical problems (software programs, data flow between universities and central administration etc.) and troubles with translation, some institutions do not issue to all graduates (case in Greece, Denmark and Germany), automatically (in Central and Eastern Europe), free of charge (in Hungary, Serbia and indirectly in Turkey) and a widely spoken European language (in Hungary and Romania only issued in national language) (ESIB, 2005, p. 34/35). Both the Trend IV and the ESIB report regard, its main weakness remains the lack of inclusion of learning outcomes, as well as program details which would […] to supply the necessary information on the knowledge and proficiency of the degree-holder (Reichert & Tauch, 2005, p. 27; ESIB, 2005, p. 35/36). The majority of Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) use ECTS as a unit for both accumulation and transfer (in Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Estonia, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Romania, Sweden and Switzerland) or are at least working on its implementation (Bulgaria, Croatia, Finland, Poland, Spain and Portugal), while the UK and Turkey still limit the use of ECTS to student mobility only (Reichert & Tauch, 2005, p. 23). The fact that HEIs decide independently on how much ECTS should be granted for a certain module leads to diverging and sometimes even contradicting practices. ESIB criticizes that professors roughly estimate the workload (which provides the basis for the amount of credits obtained), instead of referring to student input when calculating the ECTS amount 10 . Thus it can be said that the student workload is inappropriately measured because it is mostly based on contact hours with professors, neglecting the students’ time spent on self- study (ESIB, 2005, p. 47). Simply put, it can still not be relied upon that one ECTS in one country equals one ECTS in another country. Thirdly, Trend IV findings prove that a correlation exists between improved QA within institutions and the level of institutional autonomy (Reichert & Tauch, 2005, p. 7). It has been shown that HEIs in countries that grant most institutional autonomy (namely UK, 10 Good practices in obtaining student input for the calculation of ECTS exist in Estonia, Finland, the Netherlands, Norway and the UK (ESIB, 2005, p. 44). 16
Maastricht European Studies Papers 2007/07 L. Unbehauen Ireland, Finland, the Netherlands, Denmark and Austria) take the European lead, in regard to internal quality assessment. Other HEIs that are under more severe restrictions as for instance in Belgium, Greece and some Länder of Germany display a less coherent internal QA (p. 32) because they are not independent in the selection of students and staff. The above-mentioned problems give only a short review of the current state of the Bologna Process. Nonetheless, what becomes clear is that now that it is half way through, many practices exist on paper but in reality they are only partially implemented. After digging deeper underneath the smooth surface, it appears that, despite a continuous development of the Bologna Process into the right direction, not all that glitters is gold. 7. Conclusion: Factors on the Road to Success It is undeniable that there has been ongoing development in higher education in the last decade. Education has turned into a common concern instead of being an isolated national policy field. The scholars Huisman and Van der Wende go even so far to say that “much of the fear of national governments for intervention in domestic affairs has been erased by positive experiences and developments” (2004, p. 355) such as the incorporation of internationalization into mainstream higher education policy, the rising student and staff mobility, the financial support through Commission funds and the political flexibility for governments in regard to implementation of Bologna objectives. However, it is also this flexibility which provides the participating states with a loophole. That means that, despite the consensus about a common need for reform, national states commit themselves to the Bologna Process in mainly rhetoric terms but when it comes to coherent implementation they are rather reluctant. This fact diverts from the concept of a cozy consensus which the Commission tries to foster in the field of European higher education. As the fourth part of this paper has illustrated, national players even voice dissent and challenge sensitive elements of the fast-evolving process that are not in line with national preferences. Neave explains the ‘power game’ like this: “The Bologna process has now reached the stage when principles begin to assume institutional form. And institutional form is not far removed from attributing mandates. Yet, he who speaks of mandates is but one step away from bringing up the fundamental question of control and co-ordination” (Neave, 2002, p. 10) 17
Page 1 and 2: Maastricht European Studies Papers
Page 15: Maastricht European Studies Papers
Page 23: Maastricht European Studies Papers

Download paper - Maastricht University

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?