Examination of Witnesses (Questions 80-99)
MR PETER
WILLIAMS, MS
CAROLYN CAMPBELL
AND PROFESSOR
ELLA RITCHIE
10 JANUARY 2007
Q80 Stephen Williams: Do other countries
within the Bologna Process have this or is the UK standing alone
on this?
Ms Campbell: Since Bergen some
countries have indicated that they are going to develop associated
degrees which would be two year, full time programmes. The Netherlands
is one. Denmark is another. There is an interest in that sort
of model.
Q81 Stephen Williams: In their language
they will call them associate degrees, not foundation degrees,
which sounds slightly different?
Ms Campbell: For short cycle qualifications
within the first cycle of Bologna, they are national qualifications
so they will have national titles.
Q82 Stephen Williams: I want to introduce
a hot topic in the UK at the moment because of the FE Bill that
the House of Lords is considering at the moment. If the clause
within that Bill goes through to give further education colleges
the power to award their own degrees, will that cause a problem
within the Bologna Process in terms of recognition, do you think?
Does that power exist anywhere else amongst the other 44 members?
Mr Williams: I am not sure we
know the answer to that. For the most part, most countries' degrees
are awarded by the state, not by individual institutions. It does
not arise in most countries. There may be some examples in Scandinavia
but I am not sure.
Q83 Stephen Williams: Even if in
the UK degrees are awarded by higher education institutions at
the moment, if foundation degrees were to be awarded by further
education colleges, do you think that would be questioned, that
fellow members of the Bologna Process would scratch their heads
and wonder what on earth was going on?
Mr Williams: It would be another
instance of the UK doing it rather differently.
Q84 Chairman: We should be quite
relaxed about the fact that there may be some sort of structure
that people interpret differently in different countries. We should
welcome that?
Mr Williams: Yes, I think we should.
However, on the one hand I want to defend the autonomy of the
UK system so that we are not being hamstrung or forced into modes
of behaviour which are not appropriate for this country and for
our education system. On the other hand, I do not want our students
to be disadvantaged because the interpretation in other countries
is different, which is why I have great hopes for the over-arching
qualifications framework once it gets going. With all these things,
they are very much in their infancy. The idea of 2010 is, to my
mind, nonsense. This is going to take 15 to 20 years to get even
an understanding of the concept and the words.
Q85 Chairman: "Over-arching
qualification framework" fills me with dread.
Mr Williams: I can understand
that but the idea is that it is a generalised description of degrees
at each level. Each country has its own qualifications framework
which relates to it, so they do not all have to be the same but
they do have to be able to demonstrate that they meet the expectations
of the generic, over-arching structure.
Q86 Chairman: What do people in that
group in the 45 nations say about things like the Scottish MA
and the Oxford and Cambridge MA?
Mr Williams: In so far as they
are aware of them, we would suggest to them if they came and asked
us that they read the QAA's work on that which makes quite clear
that the Oxford master degree, the one you get by paying money,
is not an academic qualification. It also makes reference to the
existence of this small number of Scottish MAs which are not end-on
to bachelors degrees. It describes and explains them.
Q87 Chairman: You said Oxford and
Cambridge as well?
Mr Williams: Those are not academic
degrees because you do not have to do any work for them.
Chairman: It has always been a sense
of irritation that I worked for my masters and three of my children
did very little.
Stephen Williams: I paid £10 for
my MA.
Fiona Mactaggart: Some of us earned it
with harder work.
Q88 Chairman: Scotland is different
though, is it not, with a four year degree? They work over the
four years and get an MA?
Professor Ritchie: Yes.
Q89 Chairman: You mentioned the amount
of MA type tuition stretching parts of the curriculum. You are
happy with the Scottish MA, are you?
Mr Williams: The MA is more complicated
now.
Professor Ritchie: That was the
case but it has now changed.
Q90 Chairman: Tell us how it has
changed.
Mr Williams: Many of the Scottish
degrees are now BAs and BScs and they do a masters degree as well.
In some subjects in some universities, their first degree is an
MA. In one or two universities, I think it is fair to say, there
is what we would call an intermediate degree which is an MA. It
is very complicated.
Q91 Chairman: I know it is complicated.
In Edinburgh, if you take a four year degree so you have done
an extra year and you get an MA, not a BA, how is that regarded?
Mr Williams: Carolyn will know
better than I because she has one.
Ms Campbell: The learning outcomes
are not masters level learning outcomes. They are bachelors level
learning outcomes and this is why learning outcomes are so important,
because of local difficulties over titles which are ancient and
historical.
Q92 Chairman: A Scottish MA is not
an academic qualification?
Ms Campbell: It is a qualification
but if you look at the learning outcomes you will see where it
can be placed.
Mr Williams: It is a first cycle
qualification.
Q93 Chairman: It is not a proper
MA in the normal sense?
Mr Williams: No. There are some
MAs in Scotland which are.
Chairman: That is very interesting because
it does unlock that kind of diversity that there is even in our
own country.
Q94 Jeff Ennis: Turning briefly to
the new, fast track, two year honours degree, is it true that
these degrees cannot be accepted under Bologna because of the
required minimum three years of study for a first cycle degree?
Mr Williams: If one says it cannot
be accepted by Bologna, there is no body which says yes or no.
It is a question of whether anybody who needs to use that degree
or needs to verify it or recognise it is going to be prepared
to do so. Of course, we do not know. The general view is that
it is going to be very difficult, irrespective of the innate virtue
of a two year, fast track bachelors degree, to sell a masters
degree that has been built on to that as a second cycle qualification,
not least because while a three plus two or three plus one or
four plus one is accepted, although in some places with misgivings,
the idea of two plus one I think probably for most countries is
going to be a step too far.
Q95 Jeff Ennis: Does this not underline
the point that we have been discussing in the earlier session,
that one of the broader concerns is that learning outcomes have
yet to be fully accepted across Europe as being more important
than the length of study?
Mr Williams: Yes. Lip service
is paid to learning outcomes. There is beginning to be an understanding
of what they mean but they are in a sense so counter to the prevailing
tradition that it is going to take a long time for them to be
both understood and embedded.
Q96 Jeff Ennis: It is going to be
quite a long time frame to get this message across?
Mr Williams: Yes.
Professor Ritchie: My personal
view is that I hope we do not press too hard for discussions around
the two year undergraduate because I think it is much more important
to ensure that we get our masters level qualifications properly
accepted. My worry is that if we push that on that agenda it contributes
to a feeling that somehow we are a bit lightweight over here and
that might have a general impact.
Q97 Jeff Ennis: It is quite low down
in rank order?
Professor Ritchie: That is my
personal view.
Mr Williams: Universities have
always been allowed to fast track individual students if they
have wanted to, if their internal regulations permitted it. There
is a distinction between allowing the occasional fast student
to go through and creating a new part of the national structure.
Q98 Chairman: Lord May apparently
got a PhD at 17, did he not?
Mr Williams: Yes.
Mr Carswell: I am not convinced that
you need the quality assurance to be managed in this way and I
do not buy into that whole presumption behind it.
Chairman: Does that lead to a question?
Mr Carswell: No.
Q99 Mr Marsden: On this issue of
the two year honours, not pushing it and all the rest of it, surely
the problem is that at least in framework this is a ministerial
conference. It is a DfES led conference. Are not DfES going to
want to push the two year thing?
Mr Williams: Our understanding
is they might.
| 
