The harmonisation of Europe’s disparate higher education system was never going to be straightforward. When 29 European countries first put their names to the Bologna Process in 1999, the idea was considered worthy, if a little far fetched.
However, structural reforms in higher education have not only taken place, but are continuing to do so across the region – somewhat surprisingly given the fact that the process is a voluntary, inter-government agreement. With the 2010 deadline looming, almost all signatories are on course to at least have begun the process.
The accord calls for a three-tier higher education system – undergraduate, master and doctorate. Further objectives include student and faculty mobility, and raising the international competitiveness of Europe’s higher education. There is also a movement away from teacher provision and towards a student-centred concept of higher education.
Overall, response to the accord has been enthusiastic, with the recognition that in a global economy a single, common higher education structure that can be readily understood by employers and institutions has to be beneficial. Currently, 46 European countries have signed up, with Montenegro being the latest signatory in May.
“Generally it [the Bologna Process] is a cause for optimism,” says Gordon Shenton, associate director of the European Foundation for Management Development’s quality services department.
“I think the commitment to Bologna is strong – there are obviously problems, but I think what has been achieved is very considerable.”
One of the well-anticipated aspects of Bologna has been the boom in the masters market. In its study of the Bologna Process and its impact on the future of graduate management education, the Graduate Management Admission Council (GMAC) has predicted that in the field of graduate management education alone, more than 12,000 master programmes will be established in Europe thanks to the initiative. But scratch the surface a little and problems begin to emerge.
“The Bologna process is a voluntary, inter-governmental agreement, but there is a lot of local interpretation,” says Peter Williams, president of the European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA), a consultative member of the Bologna Process. “We are all using the same words but in different ways; it is a language of many different dialects.”
Timeline
1998 Sorbonne Declaration: the UK, France, Germany and Italy take first steps to agreeing a coherent European higher education system
1999 Bologna Declaration: 29 European countries agree to establishment of a European Higher Education Area by 2010
2001 Prague summit: Bologna members agree aditionally to focus on lifelong learning
2005 Bergen summit: Standards and guidelines for quality assurance in the European Higher Education Area adopted
2010 Deadline for implementation of the Bologna Process
With the advent of Bologna, he adds: “A lot of bandwagons have been rolled into the European higher education arena.” Many countries, he says, have used the Bologna Process for their own internal purposes, telling universities they must cover certain topics “because Bologna demands it”, when this is not in fact the case.
“It will take a long time to get the necessary common understanding, to achieve a true appreciation of our different cultures, before there can be a serious European higher education area.
“We need to have a genuine cultural understanding about what we share and what we don’t share and why. The reality is that there are very different approaches to higher education,” he adds.
One area where such different approaches are coming under scrutiny is in the length of the masters programmes. Whereas England and Wales have a well-established tradition of a one-year masters programme, many countries in continental Europe favour a two-year programme.
“There is a perception in the UK that one-year masters programmes are not going to be acceptable under Bologna,” says Mr Williams. However, he is confident that there is little to fear. As part of the process, he says, every country must self-certify that its qualification framework is compliant with that of Bologna.
“We should have little difficulty in being able to demonstrate our degrees are compliant with Bologna, through rigorous, externally validated self-certification.”
Prof Shenton voices further concerns: “To what extent will the universities play the game as it was intended in the Bologna reforms?” He points out that many institutions are still clinging to the idea of research-based education and are reluctant to see the end-point as a three-year batchelor’s degree. “They [universities] see it really only as a stepping stone to the masters degree, where students will do a research project and a thesis. To what extent will the three years and two years be separate and will universities reselect students for the masters programme?”
The risk, says Prof Shenton, is that universities will undergo cosmetic changes to meet the reforms, without actually addressing the pertinent issues.
“It is very hard for universities used to a certain structure to put it all on the table and start again. This is a very, very difficult challenge and I don’t think the universities have really finished this process … It is still a work in progress.”
A further potential problem area may well be that of the recognition of qualifications. The European Credit Transfer System (ECTS), which has traditionally defined credits in terms of student contact hours and workloads has been adopted by the Bologna Process. However, Mr Williams points out that the UK higher education system has moved away from workloads and towards learning outcomes. “Although ECTS is now supposedly embracing learning outcomes too, there is still an emphasis in many countries on workloads, which makes it difficult to compare like with like,” he says.
Whatever the outcome, Mr Williams believes there is momentum and that the Bologna process cannot be stopped. Neither should it be. A sharing of systems, student and faculty mobility are all to be welcomed, he believes. “The steps are more or less in the right direction, but we are a long, long way from a coherent, fully functioning system.”
