Memorandum submitted by the Science Council
THE SCIENCE
COUNCIL
The Science Council is a membership organisation
representing the learned societies and professional institutions
across the breadth of science in the UK. There are currently 30
member organisations listed in appendix 1.[29]
The Science Council's purposes are to provide
a collective voice for science and scientists and to maintain
standards across all the scientific disciplines. The Science Council
provides its member organisations with opportunities to share
common concerns, to network with government and others, and to
work towards collective action to achieve multidisciplinary solutions
to emerging issues.
CHARTERED SCIENTIST
The Science Council was awarded its Royal Charter
in October 2003, and Licenses suitably qualified professional
institutions to award the designation of Chartered Scientist (CSci).
The Chartered Scientist qualification (CSci) reflects best practice
in science and is set at a benchmark level (Masters Level) throughout
the science professions. With increasing focus on the inter-disciplinarity
of science it is vital for scientists to have professional recognition
that is applicable across a range of scientific disciplines.
A Chartered Scientist is a professional for
whom the knowledge and skills acquired in an accredited scientific
Masters level degree (or equivalent) is critical to his/her job
competence. Many of our Licensed Bodies formally accredit university
programmes, including Bachelors, Integrated Masters and postgraduate
Masters programmes.
The Science Council welcomes the broad objectives
of the Bologna Process to establish a common structure of higher
education systems across Europe based on two main cycles' undergraduate
and graduate aiming therefore to remove the obstacles to student
mobility across Europe and enhance the attractiveness of European
higher education worldwide. Focus has extended beyond these two
cycles so that doctoral level qualifications are now considered
as the third cycle in the Bologna Process.
BOLOGNA PROCESS—MAIN
ISSUES OF
CONCERNS
— There has been a distinct lack of
engagement from UK Government with UK universities on the implications
presented by the Bologna Process.
— There is a wide disparity in understanding
and engagement across UK HE Institutions—it is important
that there is a consistent approach and understanding of the Bologna
Process across the HE community.
— There is a wide disparity in understanding
and engagement across the science, technology, engineering and
mathematics (STEM) community.
— Under Bologna, there is a risk that
the popular and successful UK Integrated Masters degree is seen
as an intermediate qualification rather than meeting the requirements
of a 2nd cycle qualification.
— Under Bologna, there is a risk that
both the UK Bachelors and one-year postgraduate Masters degrees
are seen as "lightweight", meeting the minimum requirement
of the credit range defined under Bergen (180 and 90 credits respectively).
— It is apparent that some universities
are considering including additional credits to the final year
of their Integrated Masters programmes. This raises a number of
issues, including how inclusion of additional credits could realistically
be achieved in an already full curriculum, and additional credits
in the final year could not exceed the maximum allocation of ECTS
points in one calendar year of 75 credits which would still not
meet the minimum credits required under Bergen.
— The alternative to the incorporation
of additional credits could be an additional year of study—this
has obvious major funding implications for both the university
and the individual student and it can be reasonably speculated
that the extra costs incurred will discourage prospective students.
At a time when there is a major drive to increase student participation,
UK Government needs to consider these concerns very seriously.
BOLOGNA PROCESS—OPPORTUNITIES
Whilst there are many legitimate concerns which
need to be addressed by Government, the Bologna Process presents
some opportunities for the UK:
— The Government has an opportunity
to consult and engage widely with the professional bodies and
learned societies, in particular when considering the place of
subject specific Integrated Masters degrees in the sciences which
are popular with both students and employers.
— With its current responsibility for
providing the Secretariat to the Bologna Follow Up Group and its
Board prior to the Ministerial Summit in London 2007, the UK Government
has the opportunity to raise the profile of the Bologna Process
with HE institutions, encouraging debate and engagement of the
issues and consequences concerned with Bologna.
— There is an opportunity to engage
with employers—one of the main aims of the Bologna Process
is to enhance the employability of graduates throughout Europe
(and there is considerable effort from the STEM community to increase
student progression into fulfilling STEM related careers), therefore
it is vital that the perspective of employers is considered.
— There is an opportunity for the UK
to lead others in the area of quality assurance systems in HE.
The work of the Quality Assurance Agency for HE, as well as the
subject specific accreditation of university degrees carried out
by professional bodies combine to provide a very effective HE
QA system.
THE UK POSITION
The UK could be considered to be in a more fortunate
position than others in Europe given the UK's long standing tradition
of Bachelors and Masters level qualifications. However, differences
in the length of Masters qualifications across Europe could also
result in UK Masters programmes not being recognised with the
same esteem as those in other parts of Europe; while many European
countries offer Masters programmes lasting two years, in the UK
one-year Masters degrees are more common. In addition, unique
to the UK is the integrated four-year Masters Programmes leading
directly to a Masters level qualification (MSci, MChem, MPhys,
MMath, MEng etc).
In many science disciple is a requirement to
provide a formation with a strong scientific and mathematical
foundation, together with sufficient knowledge of advanced technical
topics, this means that very often Masters level is regarded as
the minimum for a high-level professional career. The Science
Council is committed to the highest standards of professionalism
and has set the exemplifying educational standard for the award
of Chartered Scientist (CSci) at Masters Level in science. Throughout
the Science Council's 20 Licensed Bodies, many operate formal
accreditation of academic programmes for the purposes of CSci;
these accredited academic programmes include Integrated Masters
as well as postgraduate Masters qualifications.
THE IMPORTANCE
OF LEARNING
OUTCOMES VS
TIME STUDIED
The UK assessment system is primarily based
on learning outcomes, focusing on the competences a student requires
from a study programme. The Science Council stresses the importance
of a learning outcomes approach to the qualification of undergraduate
and graduate programmes, in addition to notional time studied.
In the UK, one-year Masters programmes and integrated Masters
programmes are increasingly common in, and important to, science,
technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) disciplines.
There is a pre-occupation with the time spent
on programmes rather than learning outcomes. This could result
in one-year Masters programmes and integrated Masters programmes
being seen as "lightweight" with regard to curricula
knowledge or with respect to the weight of the research project.
Such concerns, if not addressed, would clearly have damaging consequences
for the international reputation of UK higher education. The number
of hours studied or notional "time studied" is only
one measure of a programme.
EUROPEAN CREDIT
SYSTEM (ECTS)
The Bologna Process sees credit as a tool for
removing obstacles to academic mobility, with the European Credit
Transfer System (ECTS) is used as a transfer and accumulation
system across Europe. The "Framework for Qualifications of
the European Higher Education Area" includes typical credit
allocations for each cycle:
— 1st cycle qualifications: typically
include 180-240 ECTS credits.
— 2nd cycle qualifications: Typically
include 90-120 ECTS credits, with a minimum of 60 credits at the
level of the 2nd cycle.
— 3rd cycle qualifications: not specified.
The recently published Burgess report[30]
recommends a UK national credit framework in which a three-year
FTE Bachelors with Honours qualification would attract 360 credits,
a four-year FTE Integrated Masters programme would attract 480
credits and one-year FTE Postgraduate Masters programmes would
attract 180 credits. Currently there is still some confusion as
to the relationship between the proposed UK National Credit Framework
and ECTS—ECTS credits are defined so that an academic year
contains 60 credits and are measures of student workload rather
than a combination of the many factors which determine the level
achieved in a degree programme. It is therefore important that
the key criteria for comparing and measuring degree programmes
should be learning outcomes.
If 60 ECTS credits are taken as equivalent to
120 UK National credits, UK Honours degrees at Bachelor level
in science and mathematics should have no difficulty in being
recognised as first cycle qualifications (180 ECTS credits = 360
UK National Credits). In addition a one year postgraduate Masters
would also meet the minimum ECTS credits required and therefore
meet the requirements for second cycle qualifications. However,
the position for MSci (and MChem, MPhys, MMath etc) degrees requires
more consideration, in particular:
— with integrated Masters programmes
at 480 UK national credits, equivalent to 240 ECTS which is significantly
short of the minimum 270 required for 1st + 2nd cycle
— the MSci is at present a single qualification,
and to be recognised as a second cycle qualification in terms
of the Bologna Process would need to be preceded by a first cycle
award.
In addition, whilst BSc Honours and one year
postgraduate Masters qualifications meet the requirements for
1st and 2nd cycle respectively, they only meet the minimum requirements
and therefore risk being considered as "lightweight"
or "lowest-level".
SUBJECT STATEMENTS
The QAA subject benchmark statements provide
general guidance for articulating the learning outcomes from degrees
in a range of subject areas, including many in the sciences. They
also represent general expectations about the standards for the
award of qualifications at a given level and articulate the attributes
and capabilities that those possessing such qualifications should
be able to demonstrate. However, whilst there are many science
subject benchmarks at the Honours Level, currently none have yet
been published for the Masters-Level.
There is then an opportunity to support the
UK model with the development of an M level statement(s), including
for integrated Masters programmes, offering an assurance to others,
in particular Europe, about the parity of academic standards at
this level, based on the achievement of learning outcomes rather
than the length of an award.
CONCLUSIONS
UK Government and universities need to take
full account of the effects of the Bologna Process, in particular
its potential to affect the standing and recognition of UK graduates
in Europe and Worldwide.
There is a need to ensure that UK Masters degrees
are genuinely at the Masters Level. In addition, it is important
that the advantages of the UK system are explained and defended
in Europe especially to establish that the UK has a second cycle
of higher education that is seen to be at the leading edge of
learning outcomes and output standards, so that graduates from
UK higher education institutions can compete with those from Europe
and beyond.
December 2006
29 Not printed. See www.sciencecouncil.co.uk//Memberorganisations.php Back
30
Proposals for national arrangements for the use of academic credit
in higher education in England-Final report of the Burgess Group.
http://bookshop.universitiesuk.ac.uk/downloads/Burgess_credit_report.pdf Back
| 
