Memorandum submitted by the National Postgraduate
Committee (NPC)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Bologna Process was created as a 10 year
programme which it is nearing its completion. The NPC urges more
dissemination of information on the process to staff, institutions
and importantly students to engage them in the process. The UK
offers diverse and varied higher education experiences through
student experience and higher education opportunities. The Bologna
Process offers an opportunity for education to benefit society
through access and its importance as a public good. Higher Education
mobility must be protected to enrich the European knowledge economy.
THE NATIONAL
POSTGRADUATE COMMITTEE
OF THE
UNITED KINGDOM
The National Postgraduate Committee (NPC) represents
over 500,000 postgraduate students. It is the principal representative
body of postgraduate students in the UK. As a registered charity
(no SC033368), our aim is to promote, in the public interest,
postgraduate education in the UK. We share best practice through
publications and meetings, respond to consultations, address conferences
and take on casework. In the furtherance of our aims, we co-operate
with other like-minded democratic student bodies, professional
associations and trades unions.
THE NPC AND
THE BOLOGNA
PROCESS
The National Postgraduate Committee has been
a supporter of the Bologna Process both nationally and through
EURODOC, the European Council of doctoral candidates and young
researchers federation of which the UK is a member (http://www.eurodoc.net).
The NPC has also been involved in the sector working group on
the implementation of the European Charter and Code of Conduct
for Researchers in the UK (http://www.europeunit.ac.uk/resources/gapanalysis.pdf).
The Bologna Process is nearing its completion and the NPC agrees
it is timely to reflect on the project and its achievements thus
far to ensure its outcomes in making research an attractive career
prospect and creating a knowledge economy with the support for
all parties involved is achieved.
The NPC welcomes the Bologna Process as it promotes
mobility and therefore emphasises the importance that education
plays in the social dimension. The process sees Higher Education
as a public good and co-operation rather than competition as a
part of being a public responsibility.
As part of the NPCs involvement in the Bologna
Process we are hosting the Eurodoc Annual Conference which seeks
to produce policy outcomes and shape the student led agenda in
postgraduate and postdoctoral education. The conference will be
taking place between 15 and 17 March in London as a precursor
to the next intergovernmental ministerial conference.
The NPC is however concerned that the awareness
of the process by students, institutions, staff and employers
has not increased during the process. The NPC would welcome a
mapping exercise, similar to the UUK European Charter and Code
of Conduct, to evaluate the embedding and output of the Bologna
Process for stakeholders involved in the UK. The NPC would support
the National Union of Students call to establish research into
the implementation of the Bologna Process and how for example
institutions would pass the Diploma Supplement test and the Credit
Test for example.
THE BOLOGNA
PROCESS
The Bologna Process has been a massive success,
resulting in agreement throughout Europe and opportunity to develop
a knowledge economy, social mobility and sustained public good
through investment in Higher Education. The process has furthermore
set a standard in a global context which highlights the importance
of Higher Education but which presents the process with a need
to develop the opportunities for participating countries to remain
competitive against other global schemes. This offers a real chance
of engagement with all parties in the process and particularly
students to ensure that the attainment of learning objectives
is facilitated holistically.
MASTERS DEGREES
The question of duration of Masters programmes
has been a key issue in considerations of the implications of
the Bologna Process. The issue of Masters Degrees in relation
to the Third Cycle—Doctoral Programmes will be outlined
further below. The National Postgraduate Committee recognise the
variety and range of Masters' degrees in the UK as offering different
learning outcomes which offer the opportunity to enrol in doctoral
studies programmes. Masters degrees should offer learning outcomes
and a variety of opportunity for career development and lifelong
learning opportunities but ensure there is an ability to enrol
in doctoral programmes.
The National Postgraduate Committee believes
it is important that Masters fees are not left to market intervention
due to their importance in relation to first and third cycle degrees.
While institutions should seek to address the costs of providing
Masters programmes, Masters programmes should be regulated to
ensure those choosing courses are able to do so based on suitability
rather than cost and to ensure that the widening participation
agenda is emphasised through all three cycles for the benefit
of society and the public good.
THE THIRD
CYCLE
The National Postgraduate Committee strongly
welcomed the introduction of the action line recognising the Third
Cycle and welcomes the strong relationship to the first and second
cycles.
Doctoral education must be considered in relation
to the three Bologna cycles wholly but also to subsequent career
stages; research is a core component of the doctorate but there
is also a need to consider the development of transferable skills.
We recognise the importance of the link between
all cycles and the importance for students of the ability to undertake
the third cycle after finishing first or second cycle degrees.
The National Postgraduate Committee recognises and welcomes the
diversity and opportunity other forms of doctorate offer and will
subsequently use the term Doctoral or PhD to represent all doctoral
degrees by research or otherwise.
The great diversity of PhD programmes emerging
from the changing labour market and employability issues within
and external to academia provides a valuable opportunity for societal
development and as a catalyst to develop other innovative doctoral
programmes such as "professional" doctorates. This diversity
within the aim of mobility within Europe offers great scope to
institutions to consider internationalisation within their programmes
and institutional development.
The importance of the link between the three
cycles extends most importantly to the social and student dimension
of the third cycle. There needs to be a link in investment between
the three cycles and targeted investment in the third cycle is
clearly needed alongside and to support greater equity in challenging
gender balance and financial disadvantage. The Second Cycle cannot
be left to market forces if the development of equity in gender
and finance are to be addressed and the development of new forms
of PhD with associated societal benefits are to be seen.
Higher Education Institutions' roles
HEIs are aware of their responsibility to ensure
doctoral programmes are developed which are of high quality. The
Salzburg Principles recognise the key to this ambition is achieving
critical mass which requires institutions to develop strategies
and policies to create a framework for such a mass.
Institutions must promote attractive career
routes for doctoral candidates alongside nonacademic sectors to
encourage pathways within and outside academia and between academia
and non-academic sectors of employment which should support societal
and economic development and further strengthen the three cycles.
Institutions should also provide information about the requirements
of pursuing an academic career if it requires the attainment of
further skills such as teaching requirement training. This information
and information on doctoral programmes should be available through
both preceding cycles.
Furthermore institutions must create attractive
conditions to support research by using the European Researchers
Charter and the Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers.
The development of European Quality Assurance alongside such conditions
to ensure attractive research needs to be balanced however by
support for institutional staff using such processes and the increased
pressures for students engaged in more levels of quality assurance.
Institutions can also support new doctoral students
by creating good quality effective PhD training. Institutions
creating critical mass should consider other factors that add
to the value for the institution and support the student in the
third cycle. The National Postgraduate Committee understands that
different solutions may be appropriate for different contexts
but these should seek to:
— avoid the isolation of the young
researcher, from other disciplines, or from the larger peer group,
or the larger scientific community;
— establish transparency of expectations,
quality and assessment standards through supervision and viva
assessment; and
— create synergies regarding generic
skills training (at institutional or at interinstitutional level).
The NPC notes the creation of successful, high
quality graduate school structures in Europe. There are two variations
in such structures but which both provide valuable institutional
support for doctoral programmes and students:
— structures including master and doctoral
candidates with crosscutting administrative support; or
— structures including doctoral candidates
only, around a research theme, possibly including several institutions.
Access and admission
The increasingly competitive environment for
institutions means it is essential to maintain flexibility in
admissions to doctoral programmes. Further flexibility is required
due to institutional autonomy itself with the variety in institutional
missions and context. There are also initiatives such as Lifelong
Learning that compound the need for variety and difference in
entry requirements.
The National Postgraduate Committee believes
that flexibility of entry requirements is important in addressing
the issues of equity in gender and finance together with moving
towards a learning outcome based approach for first, second and
third level cycles. We support the Bologna commitment that the
second cycle gives access, or a right to be considered for admission,
to the third cycle but also note that it is important that there
should be access possibilities in place for graduates of first
cycle programmes if they have the necessary competencies and have
met the learning outcomes to continue onto the third cycle.
The National Postgraduate Committee believes
that doctoral students should be given the same rights to participation
as students in other cycles and the social protection of those
employed in respect to pension provision. Doctoral students are
both students and also early career stage researchers. As such
they should all have the benefits of access to the facilities
of the HEI and to social welfare. The NPC strongly wishes to avoid
a two-tier doctoral community of those who are funded receiving
more benefits than those selffunding. All doctoral students should
have access to secure funding for their studies and living costs,
social and health assurance together with student benefits.
Masters degrees
Second cycle studies should equip students with
the necessary competencies in order to undertake research activities
and enrol in doctoral studies. These programmes should be learning
outcome based, like all three cycles, and should not stipulate
the required duration of the programme.
The range and diversity of Masters' degrees
in the UK should be seen as an example of the variety of the learning
outcome of the second cycle to positively develop career development
and lifelong learning opportunities. As outlined earlier, this
cycle should not be solely left to market intervention due to
its role as part of the first and third cycles.
Improving the quality of doctoral programmes
All awards described as Doctorates should, regardless
of type or form, be based on a core minimum level of process and
outcomes, and there should be no doctorate without original research.
Doctoral programmes should however cater for a variety of purposes.
Two of the goals of the Dublin Descriptors desired
outcomes are that students "have demonstrated a systematic
understanding of a field of study and mastery of the skills and
methods of research associated with that field", and "can
be expected to be able to promote, within academic and professional
contexts, technological, social or cultural advancement in a knowledge
based society". The research required of a doctorate can
be either basic or applied. The NPC welcomes the diversity that
professional doctorates offer as part of the application of research.
Supervision, monitoring and assessment
Institutions must be encouraged and supported
in the development and dissemination of good practices in the
management of research degrees. Supervision, monitoring and assessment
are fundamentally important to the success of research and the
student experience, as recognized in the Salzburg principles.
Supervision, monitoring and assessment arrangements
should be based upon a transparent contractual framework of shared
responsibilities between candidates, supervisors and the institution
and where appropriate, partners. These guidelines are crucial
to ensure the student is aware of what to expect from supervisor
and to create structures to protect the student from maltreatment.
Students should have more than one supervisor
to allow for more contact and engagement in research. They should
also have the right to change supervisor without prejudice through
restarting research and that they are able to access both male
and female supervisors.
Supervision should be competent and supervisors
should be trained. There should be mandatory training and performance
review of supervisors and continuous professional skills development
of academic staff. Supervision is so integral to the success of
doctoral programmes that training should be the responsibility
of the Government or agency and the HEI. Supervisors should be
supported and dialogue created to enable facilitation of situations
arising as well as to ensure the workload of supervisors is appropriate.
The assessment of doctoral studies should be
done by a team that are not those who supervise the doctoral student.
The viva should be recorded or independently chaired to support
fairness and transparency in the process and aid any complaints
or appeals. Assessment by publication should not be a requirement
for assessment and should not be required before the assessment.
Generic skills training
Generic skills training is an important part
of the third cycle together with the first two cycle study programmes.
It should be developed as part of an institutional support structure
at doctoral level. The primary goal of institutional structures
should be to raise awareness amongst doctoral candidates of the
importance of acquiring and communicating such skills, improving
their employment prospects. It should also recognize previously
acquired skills and seek to highlight how to make them visible
in the labour market.
Public responsibility
Doctoral candidates are early stage researchers
who are vital to Europe's development, as stated in the Salzburg
principles, and should have such rights together with academic
structures and career perspectives to enable them to continue
to post-doctoral research.
If the number of researchers is to rise and
be covered by appropriate salaries, the Government should invest
more into research and social infrastructure for researchers in
order to the make the UK more attractive within the European Research
Area.
Funding
The tenth Salzburg principle is ensuring appropriate
and sustainable funding of doctoral programmes and candidates.
This is crucial given the crucial role of doctoral research within
global research output, the formative stage of a research career
in both academia and non-academic sectors of employment and that
the attractiveness of a future career in research is determined
largely at the doctoral stage.
Doctoral students require social security and
a stable financial situation in order to be able to concentrate
on their work and successfully complete it. Specific attention
should be paid to visa and permit procedures for families of doctoral
students.
It is important that funding for doctoral candidates
should cover the full period of the doctoral programme and the
full extent of doctoral training including related courses. It
is important to indicate a certain timeframe for the duration
to support students with non-traditional backgrounds and also
to develop the possibilities for part-time doctoral studies and
the possibilities to combine doctoral studies with another work.
Funding should be sufficiently attractive to encourage suitably
qualified candidates from lower income groups as well as sufficiently
flexible to support the needs of part-time doctoral students and
others within the context of lifelong learning.
Funding is however a long-term investment that
requires stable and unconditioned funding. A commitment must be
recognized and followed by the HEI and government. The Government
should recognize the link between first and second cycles to the
third cycle and research elements being present in all three cycles
requiring investment in students from the first day of their studies.
MOBILITY
Mobility is a key feature of Bologna. UK student
mobility is affected by factors including language and student
finance but there are also concerns on the mobility of staff and
postdoctoral researchers.
Mobility issues particularly affect third cycle
students who are not able to gain funding possibilities for research
in other countries and research council funding is only available
for domicile students in the UK.
Mobility is also a concern for addressing issues
of widening participation and gender. All doctoral students should
have access to secure funding for their studies and living costs,
social and health assurance together with student benefits. The
commitment to widening participation and promoting equality of
opportunity might also present problems as high quality students
are forced to exit in order to provide for themselves financially.
Alongside financial issues in widening participation
there is also a need to address social and cultural barriers,
particularly with access to doctoral studies. Training for supervisors
to make them aware of biases and other perspectives should be
mandatory. Students with disabilities should also receive support
and individual assessment of needs by the HEI must be undertaken.
DIPLOMA SUPPLEMENT
The National Postgraduate Committee welcomes
the introduction of the Diploma Supplement as a tool for students
to recognise their achievements and credits and as a tool to aid
mobility. We believe however that employers and institutions need
to liaise to recognise what achievement is measured including
other holistic information, particularly for postgraduate second
and third cycle degrees.
FUNDING THE
THREE CYCLES
Undergraduate Funding
There is a need to consider the three cycles
funding relationship and not rely on the market to provide for
second cycle programmes and limited financial support for third
cycle programmes.
At undergraduate level there are opportunities
for horizontal mobility with programmes provided by a students
home country allowing for part of to be studied in another. The
awareness of this ability is limited and more UK students would
benefit from the mobility experience. Associated funding issues
such as childcare grants and other national benefits like social
security benefits can be an obstacle as they cannot be paid abroad.
Other EU countries, such as Ireland, offer maintenance for those
studying elsewhere and such scheme should not be administratively
burdensome http://www.education.ie/servlet/blobservlet/student_financial_support.pdf?language=EN).
Alternatively, an ESIB supported idea is for the host country
to finance the fees and living costs of students. This would be
dependent on reciprocal agreements with other EU countries and
issues such as social security benefits to be addressed.
Masters funding
As noted previously, leaving Masters fees to
the market is undesirable due to their importance in the three
cycles and as a link to both third cycle programmes but also to
life-long learning and continuing professional development. The
National Postgraduate Committee would recommend the extension
of the undergraduate loans scheme to enable those with competencies
to be able to complete Masters programmes.
There are also increased concerns on fees at
Masters level and combined undergraduate and masters programmes
to enable students to continue onto third cycle programmes. The
EPSRC notes the potential impact of accumulating `undergraduate
debt in engineering which it estimates to be 20% higher than the
average and substantially higher than the arts' presumably reflecting
the length of programmes.
The common perception that most postgraduates
come straight from their undergraduate courses is misleading.
Most entrants to all types of postgraduate course are older than
22 and there are more first-year postgraduates above the age of
30 than below the age of 25. Part-time students tend to be older
still, most being over 30. The over-30s constitute a substantial
majority among part-time students starting every type of postgraduate
course.
Doctoral programme funding
The appropriate and sustainable funding of doctoral
programmes is a principle of the Salzburg principles. It is integrally
related to the earlier two cycles with growing student debt and
increases in undergraduate fees placing a renewed emphasis on
financial rewards as an attraction to careers in research. Ackers
2006 report on Assessing the impact of the Roberts Review Enhanced
Stipends and Salaries on Postgraduate and Postdoctoral Positions
noted that pay is a dimension shaping the relative attractiveness
of academic research careers and is concerned primarily to encourage
researchers to progress and remain within the UK academic sector
(http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/cmsweb/downloads/rcuk/researchcareers/summary-stipend.pdf).
Furthermore as noted above, Doctoral students
require social security and a stable financial situation in order
to concentrate on their work and successfully complete it. Funding
should be sufficiently attractive to encourage suitably qualified
candidates from lower income groups as well as sufficiently flexible
to support the needs of part-time doctoral students and others
within the context of lifelong learning.
Research in the UK shows that students from
groups at a disadvantage tend to enrol in lower level, shorter
or more vocational courses, and closer to home. (Callender,
2003 and 2002; M Farr "Home or Away"? 2001 quoted in
Callender, 2003).
A large proportion of postgraduates are self-funding
and prospects for growth amongst home students depends on this
number increasing. An extension of the students loans scheme to
cover those not able to gain funding and Research Council Funding
for students for EU study would seek to address the decline in
domicile students.
CONCLUSION
The Bologna Process has been successful and
the UK Government must continue to play a leading part in the
successor development from the process. There must however be
a greater dissemination of the process to and engagement with
all stakeholders.
To facilitate the development of the process
we would argue that the successor process establishes a permanent
secretariat and widens its participation and transparency to make
substantial developments on the knowledge economy and social development
through Higher Education.
RECOMMENDATIONS
— Agency led training co-ordination
for supervisors and recognition of importance of supervision to
successful completion of doctoral research.
— Increased awareness training and
publicity for Higher Education Staff about the implications of
Bologna.
— Institutional evaluation of Bologna
Implementation, specifically on Diploma Supplements and Credit
worth.
— Extension of scrutiny by Select Committee
on lifelong learning and its concern with student funding, accreditation
of prior learning, and student participation.
December 2006
| 
