DOCSLIB.ORG

The Bologna Process

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Bologna Process House of Commons Education and Skills Committee The Bologna Process Fourth Report of Session 2006–07 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 16 April 2007 HC 205 Published on 30 April 2007 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £22.00 The Education and Skills Committee The Education and Skills Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Department for Education and Skills and its associated public bodies. Membership at time Report agreed Mr Barry Sheerman MP (Labour, Huddersfield) (Chairman) Mr Douglas Carswell MP (Conservative, Harwich) Mr David Chaytor MP (Labour, Bury North) Jeff Ennis MP (Labour, Barnsley East & Mexborough) Paul Holmes MP (Liberal Democrat, Chesterfield) Helen Jones MP (Labour, Warrington North) Fiona Mactaggart MP (Labour, Slough) Mr Gordon Marsden MP (Labour, Blackpool South) Mr Andrew Pelling MP (Conservative, Croydon Central) Stephen Williams MP (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West) Mr Rob Wilson MP (Conservative, Reading East) Powers The committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/edskills/ Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are David Lloyd (Clerk), Jyoti Chandola, (Second Clerk), Libby Aston (Committee Specialist), Nerys Roberts (Committee Specialist), Katie Phelan (Committee Assistant), and Susan Ramsay (Committee Secretary). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Education and Skills Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 6181; the Committee’s e-mail address is [email protected] Footnotes In the footnotes for this Report, references to oral evidence are indicated by ‘Q’ followed by the question number. References to written evidence are indicated by the page number as in ‘Ev 12’. The Bologna Process 1 Contents Report Page Summary 3 1 Introduction 7 2 Origins, aims and procedures 9 Origins 9 Objectives 9 Governance 10 The role of higher education institutions 12 The Fifth Ministerial Conference—London, May 2007 13 3 Purposes and action lines of the Bologna Process 15 Comparability v. standardisation 15 Mobility, employability, and competitiveness 17 Modernisation 21 Life-long Learning 23 4 Why join in? 24 The UK’s position in the EHEA 24 The minimum case for membership and the threat of complacency 25 The benefits of UK participation in the Bologna Process 27 5 Role of the European Commission 31 The European Community’s powers in education 31 Causes for concern 32 Relations with the EC and the Commission 34 Influence and constraint: the UK Government’s position 35 6 Issues in need of resolution: opportunity for progress 38 Quality Assurance 38 Credit and ECTS 41 Second cycle (Master’s) qualifications 46 Third cycle (doctoral level) 49 Shorter higher education 51 Social Dimension 52 Role of Government 53 Involvement and engagement of universities 55 7 2010 and beyond 57 Future of the Bologna Process post-2010 57 The London Summit, May 2007 58 Conclusion 60 Annex 1 62 2 The Bologna Process Annex 2 63 Conclusions and recommendations 64 Formal Minutes 73 List of witnesses 74 List of written evidence 75 Reports from the Education and Skills Committee, Session 2006–07 76 The Bologna Process 3 Summary The Bologna Process The Bologna Process is a non-binding inter-governmental initiative between a voluntary collection of signatory countries with the goal of developing a European Higher Education Area (EHEA) by 2010. The development of a broad framework to enable comparability of higher education qualifications across the EHEA, whilst maintaining the autonomy and flexibility that defines the UK higher education system, is an ambitious and important goal which will facilitate greater mobility of high level skills in an increasingly international higher education system. From its origin, the Bologna Process has been driven by leaders in higher education across Europe and reflects the Magna Carta Universitatum, a document setting out the fundamental principles on which university level education is based, signed in 1988 by heads of universities attending the 900th anniversary of the University of Bologna. With 45 signatory countries involved (and growing), it is broader than the European Community (EC) and it is a process that originated, and continues to develop, outside the EC. This inquiry has been undertaken in the immediate run up to the London Ministerial Summit on 17–18 May 2007 in order to facilitate discussion and provide a constructive contribution to the meeting in May and beyond. Comparability versus standardisation It is clear to us that the Bologna Process is in intention and design about comparability and compatibility and not about standardisation of higher education systems across the EHEA. We have been further assured in evidence that there is currently no appetite for a homogenised EHEA amongst the 45 signatory countries. Some of our evidence, however, has demonstrated that anxieties still exist, despite the formal intentions, that working to achieve comparability across the EHEA might in practice lead in the direction of standardisation or uniformity—and therefore undermine the autonomy and flexibility of the UK system. As a result, we have recommended that the Government be increasingly vigilant in guarding against a move towards bureaucratic, top- down, detailed agreements. It is of great credit to all those involved that the Bologna Process has so far maintained the pursuit of a flexible framework based on broad non- binding principles—keeping institutional autonomy at the heart of the process. We have recommended that the Government and others work to ensure this continues—and that realistic criteria and timetables are set for the achievement of the Process’s objectives to safeguard the voluntary nature of the process. Why join in? It can reasonably be claimed that the UK is in a unique position within the EHEA. The UK has a three-phase degree structure or cycle in place, similar in most respects to that espoused as a standard by the Bologna countries, and a global reputation for high quality higher education provision maintained by a well-developed and independent quality 4 The Bologna Process assurance system making it the second most popular destination in the world for international students, behind the US. The UK’s strong position in European higher education raises questions about why it needs to be involved in the Bologna Process, what it has to gain, and why the UK should help other countries in the EHEA to modernise if that is going to risk its competitive advantage. In a rapidly developing global market for higher education, however, it would be a mistake to think that the UK is in a sufficiently advantageous position as to be able to stand aside whilst other countries in the EHEA make progress through the Bologna Process. Many countries in the EHEA have a long and proud history of excellence in higher education and many European Universities are considered to be world-class institutions. In those countries in the EHEA where their higher education systems were already admired, the Bologna Process is being used to further improve and modernise higher education. We commend the work that the Government and other agencies have been doing to help shape the modernisation process across the EHEA through the Bologna Process and support this continuing role in fostering a culture of respect for institutional autonomy and flexibility in higher education. We firmly believe that such modernisation is likely to be more successful and sustainable if it reflects a partnership between government and institutions within the higher education sector. Advantages for the UK Beyond the minimum case for membership, there are genuine advantages to be gained for the UK in contributing to the achievement of the Bologna action lines that go beyond merely protecting the UK’s national interests. There are economic advantages to be gained for the UK through engagement in the Bologna Process: increased employment and productivity; and increased competitiveness of the UK higher education sector through promoting the attractiveness and international reputation of the EHEA. There are advantages for UK students in terms of increased mobility and employment opportunities. Finally there are advantages to UK universities through the increased market for both EU and international students within the EHEA, increased mobility of staff, sharing of best practice and expertise in a broad range of areas, and increased opportunities for research collaboration across the European Research Area. Role of the European Commission The European Commission, and the European Community more broadly, play an important formal role in the Bologna Process that is welcome. The expanding role of the European Community in the field of education, however, and the belief that it is seeking to expand its role through the mechanisms of the Bologna Process, is a major cause of concern to UK organisations and institutions. It is also our greatest concern regarding the future of the Bologna Process. We recommend, therefore, that the Government seeks clarification of the exact role of the Commission in the Bologna Process. A way must be found to ensure its involvement does not undermine the essentially voluntary and ‘bottom up’ approaches characteristic of its development to date. It remains crucial to the success of the Bologna Process that it remains outside the framework of the EC. We agree with the Minister that the role of the The Bologna Process 5 European Commission must be appropriately circumscribed.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ESU · Bologna at the Finish Line' (BAFL) 2 Executive Summary
    The European Students’ Union BolognA AT ThE finiSh linE An account of ten years of European higher education reform BolognA AT ThE finiSh linE An AccoUnT of ten yearS of EUropean highEr EdUcation rEform The European Students’ Union imprinT BolognA at ThE finiSh linE An Account of Ten years of European higher Education reform. content: daniela Bartolo, christian hemmestad Bjerke, Andrea Blättler, ligia deca, inge gielis, Sölvi Karlsson, Kristine Bak nielsen, Allan päll, petri rytkönen, robert Santa, melinda Szabó coordination and Editoring: Andrea Blättler & robert Santa proofreading: Emma di iorio, nUS Scotland policy and public Affairs staff, daniela Bartolo and christian hemmestad Bjerke layout and typesetting: linus rowedda cover illustration: Are Edvardsen This publication is part of the project »Enhancing the Student Contribution to the Bologna Implementation«, printed by laserline, Berlin funded with support from the European Commission. recymago, 100% recycling paper This publication reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information con- revised online Edition, february 2010 tained therein. original printed Version: Brussels, february 2010 TablE of contents What is BaFL? ................................................................................................................................................................. 1 1 OpEning wordS ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • New Zealand and the Bologna Process 2 Purpose
    New Zealand and the Bologna Process 2 PurPose This paper identifies areas of comparability between the European higher education reforms known as the Bologna Process and New Zealand’s tertiary education system. It outlines action government agencies will take to enhance New Zealand’s engagement with the Bologna Process at the system level. It also provides a framework within which New Zealand institutions can consider their own alignment to the Bologna Process. structure Foreword ........................................................................................ 3 IntroductIon ...........................................................................................4 Background on the Bologna Process ............................................. 5 the Bologna Frame ......................................................................... 8 Bologna degree cycles .............................................................. 9 Bologna tools ........................................................................ 13 EuroPean credIt transFer and accumulatIon system Diploma suPPlement QualIty assurance QualIFIcatIons Frameworks The Bologna envIronment ...................................................... 20 Lifelong learnIng and wIdenIng access The euroPean dImensIon Bologna’s InternatIonal strategy Further InFormatIon ................................................................... 26 3 Foreword Since its inception in 1999, the Bologna Process has had a significant impact on European higher education. As the implications of Bologna
    [Show full text]
  • Click Here for Download
    GUIDE TO HIGHER EDUCATION IN NORWAY STUDY IN NORWAY. STUDYINNORWAY.NO FACTS ABOUT NORWAY OFFICIAL NAME: The Kingdom of Norway LOCATION: Northern Europe with borders to Finland, Sweden, Russia, the North Sea and the North Atlantic Ocean WELCOME AREA: 385,186 km2 MAINLAND: 323,787 km2 SVALBARD AND JAN MAYEN: 61,399 km2 TO NORWAY. LENGTH OF COASTLINE: 25,148 km, including fjords STUDY OFF THE BEATEN TRACK LARGEST LAKE: Mjøsa, 362 km2 – GO NORTH! HIGHEST MOUNTAIN: Galdhøpiggen, 2,469 m POPULATION: 5 258 317 (01.01.2017) CAPITAL CITY: Oslo Education for all, high academic quality, a modern society GOVERNMENT: Constitutional monarchy and an attractive lifestyle. These are key phrases used by international students in Norway, and it is all true. LANGUAGE: Norwegian Bokmål and Nynorsk and in some districts also Sámi STUDYINNORWAY.NO MONETARY UNIT: Norwegian kroner, NOK TERRAIN: 44 national parks and 11 glaciers NATURAL RESOURCES: Petroleum, copper, natural gas, fish, timber, hydropower π π Source: Statistics Norway GUIDE TO HIGHER EDUCATION IN NORWAY 04-05 STUDY IN NORWAY “Education for all” is the basic principle of the Norwegian educational system. In addition to the diploma, all students According to the law, every child is ensured a minimum of 13 years’ education, will also receive a Diploma Supplement THERE IS LOTS OF regardless of social or cultural background and possible special needs. The (DS) from their Norwegian institution. STUDENT ENGAGEMENT Ministry of Education and Research is determined to make the Norwegian The DS gives a supplementary description AND INVOLVEMENT. educational system one of the best in the world, based on a framework of of the qualification obtained with a view MASTER STUDENT, USA lifelong learning.
    [Show full text]
  • Hungarian Higher Education in the European Higher Education Area Published on the Occasion of the Bologna Ministerial Anniversary Conference, Budapest – Vienna, 2010
    Hungarian Higher Education in the European Higher Education Area PublisHEd on tHE occasion of tHE bologna MinistErial annivErsary confErEncE, budaPEst – viEnna, 2010. The articles in this publication were written in November 2009. All authors are cited with name and surname only. Professional titles and/or academic degrees are not featured. All opinions represented are the authors’ own, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editors or the publisher. All information contained herein can be used freely for non-commercial purposes, with the appropriate acknowledgment of origin. A free electronic version of this publication is available at www.okm.gov.hu/bologna. Published by: Ministry of Education and Culture of the Republic of Hungary, H-1055 Budapest, Szalay u. 10-14. Publisher: Dr. István Hiller Editors: László Csekei, János Csirik, Tímea Szarkáné Erdélyi Editor-in-chief: László Csekei copy-editing: Csilla Bulyovszky, Árpád Mihály design: Kriszta Grész layout: Mihály Molnár Proofreading: Barbara Lázár Printed at: LKL Nyomda director: László Borsos ISBN 978-963-88269-5-4 budapest, 2010 Hungarian Higher EDucatioN in the EuRopean Higher EDucatioN Area contEnts Preface . 3 Bologna and Higher Education in Hungary. 5 The Bologna Process from an Institutional Perspective . 6 The Bologna Process and Quality in Hungarian Higher Education . 6 The Relationship of the Bologna Process and the Labour Market in Hungary. 8 The Bologna Process – a Paradigm Shift in Higher Education . 9 Junior Scholar Training and Talent Promotion from the Perspective of Doctoral Schools . 10 The Hungarian Students’ Way to “Bologna” . 11 The Credit System in Hungarian Higher Education . 12 Innovation and Three-Cycle Education in Hungary .
    [Show full text]
  • Bologna Process in Croatia
    Bologna Process in Croatia Consortia Meeting of the Tempus Project Melita Kova čevi ć UM-JEP 18094 University of Zagreb Moving Ahead with the Bologna Process in Croatia Osijek, November 2006 Bologna Process Update in Croatia Consortia Meeting of the Tempus Project Melita Kova čevi ć UM-JEP 18094 University of Zagreb Moving Ahead with the Bologna Process in Croatia Osijek, November 2006 Moving Ahead with the Bologna Process in Croatia Bologna Process 1999. Bologna declaration - signed by 29 European countries 2001. Croatia signed the Bologna declaration. 2001 – 2005 activities What? How? Problems Osijek, November 2006 Moving Ahead with the Bologna Process in Croatia Bologna Process 1999. Bologna declaration - signed by 29 European countries 2001. Croatia signed the Bologna declaration. 2001 – 2006 activities What? How? Problems Osijek, November 2006 Moving Ahead with the Bologna Process in Croatia The Bologna Process European countries with two-tier structure (Bachelor-Master) 2004. Priorities for 2005. No, planned q Two cycles Yes q Third cycle (doctoral studies) q Quality assurance system Yes, process started15 q Recognition Osijek, November 2006 Moving Ahead with the Bologna Process in Croatia The Bologna Process European countries with two-tier structure (Bachelor-Master) 2006. Priorities for 2005. q Two cycles q Third cycle (doctoral studies) q Quality assurance system q Recognition Osijek, November 2006 Moving Ahead with the Bologna Process in Croatia Universities in Croatia University of Zagreb University of Osijek University of Rijeka University of Zadar University of Split University of Dubrovnik Osijek, November 2006 Moving Ahead with the Bologna Process in Croatia Universities in Croatia University of Zagreb 2006.
    [Show full text]
  • Recognition Issues in the Bologna Process with Conclusions and Recommendations (Riga, Latvia, January 25-26, 2007)
    BFUG10 6b Report from the Official Bologna Seminar on Recognition issues in the Bologna Process With Conclusions and Recommendations (Riga, Latvia, January 25-26, 2007) Pavel Zgaga The recognition of qualifications has always been one of the key priorities of the Bologna Process since it is a key element in facilitating mobility of students and graduates. In this regard, mobility should be understood as a free mobility of students, graduates and staff within the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) as well as with other parts of the world (mobility to and from the EHEA). 1. The context of a new seminar on recognition issues Recognition issues have always found a sound position in the Bologna follow-up activities. In Prague, “Ministers encouraged the follow-up group to arrange seminars” to explore several areas in order to take the process further, including “recognition issues and the use of credits in the Bologna process” (Prague Communiqué, 2001). The first official Bologna Seminar on these issues was held in Lisbon in April 2002, that is, during the 2001 – 2003 follow-up period. In Berlin, Ministers declared to “strengthen their efforts to […] improve the recognition system of degrees and periods of studies” (Berlin Communiqué, 2003). During the period 2003 – 2005, the second Seminar was held in Riga (December 2004). The ENIC and NARIC Networks as well as the Committee of the Lisbon Recognition Convention have also importantly contributed to the elaboration of recognition issues within the Bologna Process (e.g. Vaduz Statement, 2003; Recommendation on the Recognition of Joint Degrees, 2004). In May 2005, when summarizing the progress in this area, Ministers in Bergen noted under the heading “Recognition of degrees and study periods” “that 36 of the 45 participating countries have now ratified the Lisbon Recognition Convention.
    [Show full text]
  • Recognition of Bologna Masters Degrees in Europe
    Recognition of Bologna Master’s Degrees in Europe Recognition of Bologna Master’s Degrees in Europe 2005-3507 / 001-001 SO2 61-NAR This research project report is published by UK NARIC. The project has been funded with support from the European Community. Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Please cite this publication as: UK NARIC et al., Recognition of Bologna Master’s Degrees in Europe, 2005, Cheltenham, England. © 2005 UK NARIC The National Recognition Information Centre for the United Kingdom Oriel House Oriel Road Cheltenham GL50 1XP e.: [email protected] w.:www.naric.org.uk 2 Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 4 Introduction / Chronology ................................................................................................ 5 1. Germany ..................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Historical Background ............................................................................................ 7 1.2 Types of Master’s degree ...................................................................................... 8 1.3 Entry ...................................................................................................................... 9 1.4 Content .................................................................................................................. 9 1.5 Structure .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Implementation of the Bologna Process in Republic of Croatia
    Jozo Krajina, doktorand Sveučilište J. J. Strossmayera u Osijeku Učiteljski fakultet u Osijeku Email: [email protected] Ana Turkalj Krajina, doktorand Sveučilište J. J. Strossmayera u Osijeku Učiteljski fakultet u Osijeku Email: [email protected] THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BOLOGNA PROCESS IN REPUBLIC OF CROATIA PRIMJENA BOLONJSKOG PROCESA U REPUBLICI HRVATSKOJ ABSTRACT Reform of higher education system in Croatia is almost a permanent state in the past thirty years. Whole time, there wasn't longer period in which higher education system could stabilize and develop on the basis of some generally accepted principles, with occasional corrections, adjustments and necessary modernization. Based on the fundamental principles and objectives of the Bologna Declaration, the Republic of Croatia went through restructuring and adaptation of high education system in the last decade. The implementation of Bologna process has resulted in a number of positive and negative consequences. The aim is to show the importance of the education system and the relationship beetween the economy and education through an analysis of the introduction of the Bologna Process in Republic of Croatia. Key words: Bologna process, higher education, educational institutions, development SAŽETAK Reforma sustava visokog obrazovanja u Republici Hrvatskoj gotovo da je trajno stanje u posljednjih tridesetak godina. Za cijelo to vrijeme nije bilo dužega razdoblja u kojem bi se sustav visokog obrazovanja mogao stabilizirati i razvijati na temelju nekih općeprihvaćenih načela, uz povremene korekcije, prilagodbe i modernizacije nužne svakom, pa i najstabilnijem sustavu visokog obrazovanja. Temeljeći se na osnovnim načelima i ciljevima Bolonjske deklaracije, Republika Hrvatska je u posljednjem desetljeću krenula putem restrukturiranja i prilagođavanja sustava visokog obrazovanja.
    [Show full text]
  • ABSTRACT: the Bologna Process, an Intergovernmental Process Of
    ABSTRACT: The Bologna Process, an intergovernmental process of voluntary policy convergence towards a common higher education structure, poses several concerns from a European law perspective. The Bologna Process takes place outside the institutional framework of the EU, while there would have been legal competence to enact the content of the Bologna Declaration as a Community measure. Hence it could be argued that Member States have straddled the borders of loyal cooperation by avoiding the institutional framework of the EC with its built-in checks and balances. They have obstructed the Community in the attainment of its tasks, which stands in tense relation to Article 10 EC. Moreover, there exist several other objections against the Bologna Process, particularly in terms of democracy, transparency and efficiency. The Bologna Process resembles a deal done in a smoke-filled room, and its voluntary character combined with a lack of coordination prevents its effective implementation. KEYWORDS: Higher Education - Bologna Process - Community Competence - Harmonization - Parallel Agreements The Bologna Process – From a European Law Perspective The Bologna Process – From a European Law Perspective* By Sacha Garben** Introduction 1. A curious thing has emerged recently in the European educational landscape. European governments have embarked on an ambitious project to reform their higher education systems so as to bring them in line with each other, with a view to create a European Area of Higher Education. This revolutionary development is coming about under the name of the ‘Bologna Process’, a process that has been set in motion quite suddenly. It was initiated in 1998, when at an international Forum organized in connection with the celebration of the 800 th anniversary of the Sorbonne University the Ministers of education of France, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom decided on a ‘Joint Declaration on harmonization of the architecture of the European higher education system’.
    [Show full text]
  • Bologna Process Implementation Report
    The European Higher Education Area in 2020 Bologna Process Implementation Report Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu). Luxembourg : Publications Office of the European Union, 2020 PRINT ISBN : 978-92-9484-357-9 doi : 10.2797/851121 EC-02-20-828-EN-C PDF ISBN : 978-92-9484-356-2 doi : 10.2797/756192 EC-02-20-828-EN-N © Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency, 2020 The Commission’s reuse policy is implemented by Commission Decision 2011/833/EU of 12 December 2011 on the reuse of Commission documents (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39 – https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/ dec/2011/833/oj). Unless otherwise noted, the reuse of this document is authorised under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This means that reuse is allowed, provided appropriate credit is given and any changes are indicated. For any use or reproduction of elements that are not owned by the EU, permission may need to be sought directly from the respective rightholders. The EU does not own the copyright in relation to any images which do not carry the copyright indicator © European Union. CREDITS Cover image : © Logo EHEA Ministerial Conference, Rome 2020 The European Higher Education Area in 2020 Bologna Process Implementation Report This document is published by the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA, Education and Youth Policy Analysis). Please cite this publication as: European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bologna Process and Heis Institutional Autonomy
    Athens Journal of Education - Volume 7, Issue 4, November 2020 – Pages 365-384 The Bologna Process and HEIs Institutional Autonomy By Linda Helén Haukland The Bologna Process has made a strong impact on the development of European higher education, although the greatest impact has not been from the process itself, but from the national reforms introduced along with it. With a relatively young higher education system, Norway was ahead of most European countries in implementing the Bologna Process and reforms indirectly linked to it. Due to path dependencies and the Higher Education Institutions being, to a certain extent, autonomous and carriers of their own culture, we cannot draw conclusions at the local level without empirical studies. Therefore, the case of Nord University shows us how this process directly and indirectly affected Higher Education Institutions in Norway. The Higher Education Institutions (HEI) integrated horizontally in an education system that was increasingly hierarchical and competitive. The need for standardisation in order to secure equality and efficiency, and the demand for greater autonomy in the HEIs was answered by strengthening some and weakening other forms of institutional autonomy along with the establishment of a new accreditation system. Three dimensions of autonomy are touched on in this study. Firstly, the question of who has decision-making power in the HEIs defines whether they are ruled by professional or administrative autonomy. Secondly, the question of the HEIs’ mission is decided either by the HEI itself, representing substantive autonomy, or by external demands on production and external funding, representing what I call beneficial autonomy. Finally, the question of how the HEIs fulfil their mission decides whether they have individual autonomy or procedural autonomy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bologna Process
    European Higher Education Area (EHEA) The Bologna Process European Higher Education Area (EHEA) The Bologna Process Prepared for The Committee of Postsecondary ADMs (PSADM) May 2008 By The CMEC Quality Assurance Subcommittee Table of Contents Overview......................................................................................................................... 1 Objectives of The Bologna Process ........................................................................... 1 Implementation Structure of The Process................................................................. 3 Ministerial Meetings — An Overview.......................................................................... 4 1998 Sorbonne Declaration......................................................................................... 4 1999 Bologna Declaration ........................................................................................... 4 2001 Prague Communiqué.......................................................................................... 4 2003 Berlin Communiqué ............................................................................................ 5 2005 Bergen Communiqué.......................................................................................... 5 2007 London Meeting .................................................................................................. 5 2009 Leuven/Louvain-la-Neuve Meeting .................................................................... 6 The Year 2010 ...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]