Memorandum submitted by the UK Bologna
Promoters
1. EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
1.1 We welcome the Bologna Process and see
it as a critical element of the Lisbon Agenda.
1.2 We see challenges and opportunities
for the UK Higher Education sector in a more open, transparent
and competitive European Higher Education Area.
1.3 We are concerned at the failure to engage
with and promote outward mobility for UK students and staff.
1.4 We consider that the sector on a whole,
not simply the representative bodies, need to engage actively
and positively with the Process.
1.5 We welcome the development of a credit
system throughout Europe although we recognise tht this requires
the UK to demonstrate how its credit recognition systems are compatible
with ECTS.
1. This submission is written on behalf
of the UK Bologna Promoters listed below.
2. The UK Bologna Promoters are nominated
by the UK Government with support from the key Stakeholders and
formally appointed with the approval of the European Commission,
with contracts from the UK Erasmus National Agency, the UK Socrates-Erasmus
Council. Each of the Bologna Promoters is active in Higher Education
and has considerable experience of work and cooperation with colleagues
and partners throughout Europe. They have been active in promoting
and explaining all aspects of the Bologna Process to the UK Higher
Education sector in a range of ways, includinig workshops, conferences,
visits to institutions, response to telephone and email enquiries.
They have all attended and contributed to Europe-wide Bologna
Promoters training in:
— ECTS and the Diploma Supplement.
— The three-cycle system.
— Quality Assurance and Enhancement.
3. The comments which follow reflect their
collective views arising from their experience and involvement
in the process.
4. IMPLICATIONS
OF THE
BOLOGNA PROCESS
FOR THE
UK HIGHER EDUCATION
SECTOR: ADVANTAGES
AND DISADVANTAGES
4.1 The UK Bologna Promoters welcome the
Bologna Process and in particular the involvement of institutions
and students in its promotion and development. They see significant
advantages for the UK system. The Process stresses the importance
of transparency in relation to understanding and recognising qualifications,
the content of degree programmes, the development of a Europe-wide
credit system and increasing emphasis on learning outcomes.
4.2 The development of a three-cycle system
provides considerable potential for the UK to market its second
cycle Masters programmes on a Europe-wide basis. We are conscious,
too, that countries and regions outside Europe, notably Australia
and a network of countries in the Pacific region, are benchmarking
their own systems against Bologna. Hence there is a truly international
dimension to the Bologna Process, which with its emphasis on three
cycle degree structures and the transparency of individual degree
programmes, will be helpful to the UK.
4.3 At the same time we recognise that with
greater transparency and understanding of the three-cycle system,
the UK will be open to increased competition from Higher Education
Institutions throughout Europe, which are increasingly offering
full degree programmes taught in English for the international
market. A particular difficulty in this context relates to the
level of UK tuition fees in contrast to those applying in many
countries which have either no or low tuition fees. It will thus
be increasingly important for UK Higher Education Institutions
to demonstrate the high quality and value of the qualifications
which they offer and which within the context of the Lisbon Recognition
Convention 1997 and the Bologna Process in general will be open
to recognition procedures throughout the EU.
5. THE AGENDA
FOR DISCUSSION
AT THE
2007 MEETING IN
LONDON—CLARIFYING
THE UK POSITION
5.1 We are not quite sure what the Committee
had in mind in this term of reference. The agenda for discussion
at the 2007 Bologna follow-up meeting, is determined in large
part by the objectives set at the Bergen meeting in May 2005 and
developed by the Bologna Follow-Up Group, which represents a number
of European partners. The UK has stressed its commitment to work
to deliver the objectives of the Bologna Process, including those
established in Bergen.
5.2 We welcome the focus which we anticipate
in London on the development of a common understanding of the
doctoral cycle; the follow-up on the Standards and Guidelines
for Quality Assurance in Europe; the increased emphasis on the
social dimension and, above all, the concern to promote and remove
obstacles to student and teacher mobility.
5.3 We are concerned about the outcome of
the Working Group on the Portability of Grants and Loans, which
might have serious implications in terms of student numbers for
the UK, although equally, we recognise that UK students may be
attracted by the relatively low cost of high quality degree programmes
in other EU countries.
5.4 As far as the Bologna Stocktaking exercise
is concerned, we would prefer to see a more evaluative approach
to the stocktaking, which might involve a more critical and objective
appraisal of where each of the Bologna countries stands in relation
to the range of indicators which have been established. The current
process depends on self-assessment and tends to present each country
in the most positive light. The view on the ground is sometimes
less confident of the achievements.
6. THE IMPLICATION
OF A
THREE-PHASE
STRUCTURE OF
HIGHER EDUCATION
AWARDS FOR
ONE-YEAR
MASTERS AND
SHORT UNDERGRADUATE
COURSES (HNCS,
HNDS AND
FOUNDATION DEGREES)
6.1 As far as we are able to judge from
our engagement with the sector and on a European level, the three
cycle structure of Higher Education awards does not present significant
challenges to the UK. Sub-degree qualifications are now recognised
in the Qualifications Framework for the European Higher Education
Area and in the European Commission's European Qualifications
Framework. However, questions have arisen in relation to UK integrated
Masters degrees in terms of their classification as both first
and second cycle degrees.[15]
6.2 Referring to one year Masters, we think
that it is vital to stress that a UK one year Masters is normally
one calendar year, often slightly more, in duration, as opposed
to one academic year. Issues have been raised in relation to the
number of ECTS credits to be allocated for a full calendar year
Masters. The current version of the ECTS User's Guide suggests
that the appropriate number of ECTS credits would be 75, whereas
the UK practice since the introduction of ECTS in the pilot project,
has been to allocate 90 ECTS credits for a full calendar year
Masters. At the same time we are aware that in many other countries,
Masters programmes continue for two academic years and are allocated
120 credits. The European Higher Education Area Qualifications
Framework envisages a range of credits for second level—Masters—programmes
from 90-120 and therefore we do not consider that the differences
should be a matter for concern. Nevertheless it is an area of
debate.
7. AWARENESS
AND ENGAGEMENT
IN THE
BOLOGNA PROCESS
WITHIN HEIS
7.1 It is important to recognise that because
UK Higher Education institutions are autonomous, there is no legal
compulsion for them to implement the Bologna Process, such as
the commitment to provide the Diploma Supplement to all students.
The role of the Bologna Promoters in cooperation with the Stakeholders
is, therefore, one of persuasion and encouragement.
7.2 Our experience suggests that, while
the key stakeholders in the sector are aware and actively engaged
in the Bologna Process, as are many of the senior managers in
Higher Education institutions, the level of awareness within institutions
among academic staff and students is relatively low. It is important,
in our view, that the process of Bologna promotion should engage
academic and administrative staff and students since over the
coming years it will have an increasing impact in a wide range
of ways. In this context we are concerned that the arrangements
for Bologna Promoters will be suspended for seven to eight months
in the first part of 2007 because there will be no Bologna contract
from the European Commission and the UK Governments are unable
to find bridging support for Bologna promotion during this period.
7.3 We are also concerned that there is
a lack of understanding among employers about the process of radical
change throughout Europe and the impact on the UK of this change.
We would cite as an example the increasing use of the Diploma
Supplement in other countries and the need for UK employers and
students to understand that the Diploma Supplement will provide
greater understanding of the qualification which an individual
student obtains and set it in the context of the National Qualifications
and European Qualifications Frameworks.
8. OPPORTUNITIES
TO ENHANCE
THE MOBILITY
OF STUDENTS
FROM THE
UK
8.1 It is our view that mobility is one
of the driving forces behind the whole Bologna Process. The limited
engagement of the UK Higher Education sector and UK students with
the opportunities provided by EU mobility programme is a matter
of concern. Mobility can help to enhance students academic and
personal skills and competences and hence their employability.
Within the Erasmus programme, France, Germany, Italy and Spain
all send substantially more students than the UK. The UK has also
been overtaken by Poland. We recognise that the Government has
made a major contribution to encourage UK mobility through waiving
the tuition fee for full year students; but it is our view that
institutions, faculties and departments need to engage more actively
in a European strategy which will embrace mobility within the
curriculum for all subject areas. In our view, UK institutions
will need incentives, through the funding system, to encourage
more active participation in mobility programmes. Such incentives
could be coupled with targets.
9. THE POSSIBLE
IMPLEMENTATION OF
A EUROPEAN
CREDIT TRANSFER
SYSTEM (ECTS) AND
A FOCUS
ON LEARNING
OUTCOMES AND
COMPETENCIES
9.1 It is important for the Committee to
understand that the majority of countries within the Bologna Process
have adopted ECTS as the basis for their national credit system
using 60 credits as the norm for a standard academic year. In
many countries this is being incorporated into the law. On the
other hand, where credits are used in the UK, the unit for an
academic year is 120. While this may be converted to and is
compatible with ECTS (subject to the caveat in 9.2 below), it
could nevertheless be seen to represent the UK resisting part
of the Bologna Process which has been adopted elsewhere. A number
of countries which had credit systems have moved to the 60 credits.
We recognise that ECTS in its current state is not a fully developed
credit accumulation system, as it would be understood within the
UK, but our experience suggests that it is evolving in that direction
and increasingly emphasising the critical importance of learning
outcomes and competencies.
9.2 An area of concern which we have
voiced to the Stakeholders in the UK relates to the workload of
a standard academic year. This is increasingly stated to be in
the order of 1,500-1,800 hours throughout the EU, whereas for
the UK the number continues to be quoted as 1,200 hours. We recognise
that these numbers are notional/average and that the key dimension
for comparability must be learning outcomes. Nevertheless, the
public assertion of a significant differential in the stated normal
and/or average workload may in the future be challenging for the
UK.
10 QUALITY ASSURANCE
SYSTEMS IN
HE (TEACHING AND
RESEARCH): THE
COMPATIBILITY OF
UK PROPOSALS AND
BOLOGNA
10.1 We welcome the publication of the Standards
and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education
Area and are confident that the UK both at national and institutional
level will be able to satisfy and implement the guidelines. We
consider that the development of these guidelines will help in
the promotion of student mobility, curriculum development and
cooperation in joint degrees at first, second and third cycle.
Moreover, the validation of the quality assurance processes in
each of the signatory countries must be of benefit to staff and
students. We hope that in particular it will facilitate the development
of more joint Masters programmes. Mutual recognition of and confidence
in the Quality Assurance systems of our partner institutions and
countries should facilitate involvement in programmes such as
Erasmus Mundus and allay concerns expressed by some institutions
about how they will satisfy concerns about quality assurance.
10.2 In our view the Erasmus Mundus programme
represents a real manifestation of the commitment of the European
Union to enhance the attractiveness of the European Higher Education
Area, a key goal of the Bologna Process. UK institutions are active
in this programme but it is noteworthy that in other countries
the rate of participation is increasing. For this programme, the
UK tuition fee remains an issue which challenges institutions
in their collaborative activity.
11. DEGREE CLASSIFICATION
REFORM IN
LIGHT OF
BOLOGNA
11.1 We are not sure that this matter is
of relevance to Bologna. We welcome the increased transparency
which the Diploma Supplement and the transcript of records will
give to the full range of students' performance and ability. The
emphasis on the learning outcomes and acquired competences is,
in our view, as significant as degree classification which, we
are aware, is under review in the Burgess Group.
12. THE BROADER
IMPACT OF
BOLOGNA ACROSS
EUROPE: A MORE
STANDARDISED EUROPE
AND THE
CONSEQUENCES FOR
THE UK'S
POSITION IN
THE GLOBAL
MARKET FOR
HE (BOLOGNA AND
THE SECOND
PHASE OF
THE PRIME
MINISTER'S
INITIATIVE FOR
INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION
(PM1 2)
12.1 The Bologna Process is not producing
a "more standardised" Europe. It is, as we have explained,
producing increasing transparency and understanding and facilitating
dialogue and collaboration in curriculum development, joint programmes
of study and mutual recognition. It is evident that there will
remain diversity throughout Europe, at an institutional and national
level within the broad framework prescribed by Bologna. At the
same time, the substantial increase in transparency, the emphasis
on student-centred learning and learning outcomes and competencies,
and engagement with issues relating to employability give increased
opportunities for the UK to attract the best and brightest students
from the European Higher Education Area to courses at all three
levels—first, second and third cycles, since students will
be increasingly aware, as will employers, that the Bologna structure
in its broadest terms operates throughout the Higher Education
Area. The high fees which apply in England may be an obstacle
to this process. We recognise that increasingly other countries
are introducing or exploring the introduction of tuition fees;
however they will for some time remain lower than the UK.
12.2 As far as the Prime Minister's initiative
is concerned, the increasing attractiveness of the whole European
Higher Education Area means that the opportunities for overseas
(in European terms "third countries") students will
increase enormously. Our partners are increasingly promoting their
programmes and offering full degrees taught in English. This means
that UK Higher Education may face increased competition but it
also provides opportunities for partnership and collaboration
which will offer students the possibility of joint degrees at
all cycles.
12.3 In conclusion, as those active within
UK Higher Education sector, we are committed to the Bologna Process,
which we see as intimately linked with the Lisbon Agenda. We are
concerned at the lack of engagement with mobility within UK Higher
Education for staff and the students. We recognise the challenge
of increasing competition, but also the opportunities for closer
collaboration. We consider that overall this will be of benefit
to the UK, its institutions, staff and students. Above all, we
recognise that this is a process which is gathering momentum throughout
the EU; hence it is critically important that the UK and the UK
Higher Education sector should engage in a proactive and supportive
rather than defensive way.
LIST OF
UK BOLOGNA PROMOTERS
Name
| Position | University
|
| Stephen Adam | Head of Undergraduate Studies, Politics
| University of Westminster |
| Professor Tim Birtwistle | Professor of Law
| Leeds Metropolitan University |
| Professor Malcolm Cook | Professor of 18th Century French Studies
| University of Exeter |
| Dr Alan Davidson | Dean, Department for the Enhancement of Learning, Teaching & Assessment
| The Robert Gordon University |
| Anne Davies | Senior Lecturer, Head of International Programmes—School of Management and Economics
| Queens University Belfast |
| Dr Howard Davies | Head of European Development
| London Metropolitan University |
| Professor Wendy Davies | Pro-Provost European Affairs
| University College London |
| James Dunphy | Project Administrator
| The Robert Gordon University |
| Professor Diane Meehan | Dean of Faculty of Technology and Environment
| Liverpool John Moores University |
| Huw Morris | Academic Registrar
| University of Wales, Swansea |
| John Reilly | UK Higher Education Expert
| |
| Professor Graeme Roberts | Formerly Vice-Principal (Teaching and Learning)
| University of Aberdeen |
| Simon Sweeney | Head of Programme MA International Studies
| York St John University |
| Dr Anthony Vickers | Head of Department—Electronic Systems Engineering
| University of Essex |
December 2006
|
| |
15
The degree of Bachelor is a first cycle degree and the Master
is a second cycle degree. UK Integrated Masters are normally four
year degrees which combine the Bachelor and Master degree in one
qualification. Back
| 
