Advertisement

Introduction

  • Cristina Sin
  • Amélia Veiga
  • Alberto Amaral
Chapter
  • 348 Downloads
Part of the Issues in Higher Education book series (IHIGHER)

Abstract

This chapter makes a presentation of the objectives of the book, which aim at developing a critical analysis of the fulfilment of the major objectives of the Bologna Process, including enhanced employability and the relevance of first cycle degrees in the labour market, increased attractiveness of the European Higher Education Area, and increased mobility. The initial part of the book discusses the nature of higher education policy and the difficulties of policy implementation in Europe and how these affect the implementation of Bologna. The second part of the book examines the implementation of the Bologna Process in Portugal as a case study. The book concludes with a comparative analysis of several European countries.

Keywords

High Education High Education System European Policy High Education Policy Lisbon Strategy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Amaral, A., & Magahlhães, A. (2001). On markets, autonomy and regulation. The Janus Head revisited. Higher Education Policy, 14(1), 7–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amaral, A., & Neave, G. (2009). On Bologna, weasels and creeping competence. In A. Amaral, G. Neave, C. Musselin, & P. Maassen (Eds.), European integration and governance of higher education and research (pp. 271–289). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amaral, A., & Teixeira, P. (2000). The rise and fall of the private sector in Portuguese higher education? Higher Education Policy, 13(3), 245–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berlin Communiqué. (2003). Realising the European Higher Education Area. Conference of Ministers responsible for higher education, Berlin, 19 September.Google Scholar
  5. Bergen Communiqué. (2005). The European Higher Education Area—Achieving the goals. Conference of Ministers responsible for higher education, Bergen, 19–20 May.Google Scholar
  6. Borrás, S., & Jacobsson, K. (2004). The open method of coordination and new governance patterns in the EU. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(2), 185–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bucarest Communiqué. (2012). Making the most of our potential: Consolidating the European Higher Education Area. Conference of Ministers responsible for higher education, Bucharest, 26–27 April.Google Scholar
  8. Budapest and Vienna Communiqué. (2010). Budapest-Vienna declaration on the European Higher Education Area. Conference of Ministers responsible for higher education, Vienna, 11 March.Google Scholar
  9. Capano, G., & Piattoni, S. (2011). From Bologna to Lisbon: The political uses of the Lisbon ‘script’ in European higher education policy. Journal of European Public Policy, 18(4), 584–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cardoso, J. L., Varanda, M., Madruga, P., Escária, V., & Ferreira, V. S. (2012). Empregabilidade e Ensino Superior em Portugal. Lisbon: Agência de Avaliação e Acreditação do Ensino Superior (A3ES).Google Scholar
  11. CHEPS and INCHER-Kassel and ECOTEC consortium. (2010). The Bologna Process independent assessment. The first decade of working on the European Higher Education Area. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
  12. De la Porte, C. (2002). Is the open method of coordination appropriate for organising activities at European level in sensitive policy areas? European Law Journal, 8(1), 38–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. De la Porte, C., & Nanz, P. (2004). The OMC—A deliberative-democratic mode of governance? The cases of employment and pensions. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(2), 267–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dehousse, R. (2002). The open method of coordination: A new policy paradigm? Paper presented at the First Pan-European Conference on European Union Politics “The Politics of European Integration: Academic Acquis and Future Challenges”, Bordeaux, 26–28 September.Google Scholar
  15. ESU.(2015). Bologna with Student Eyes: Time to meet the expectations from 1999. Brussels: European Students’ Union – ESU.Google Scholar
  16. Corbett, A. (2005). Universities and the Europe of knowledge: Ideas, institutions and policy entrepreneurship in European Union higher education, 1955–2005. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. European Commission. (2010). Europe 2020. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, COM(2010) 2020 final. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
  18. European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice. (2015). The European Higher Education Area in 2015: Bologna Process Implementation Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
  19. European Council. (2000). Presidency conclusions. Lisbon European Council, 23–24 March, Lisbon.Google Scholar
  20. European Parliament. (1997). Treaty of Amsterdam amending the Treaty of the European Union, the treaties establishing the European Communities and certain related acts. Luxembourg: European Commission.Google Scholar
  21. European Union. (1986). Single European Act. Official Journal of the European Communities, No. L 169, 29.6.1987.Google Scholar
  22. European Union. (1992). Treaty of the European Union (Treaty of Maastricht). Official Journal of the European Communities, OJ C 191, 29.7.1992.Google Scholar
  23. Fonseca, M. (2012). The student estate. In G. Neave & A. Amaral (Eds.), Higher education in Portugal 1974–2009—A nation, a generation (pp. 383–416). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  24. Goetschy, J. (2004). The open method of coordination and the Lisbon strategy: The difficult road from potentials to results. Paper presented at the IIRA 7th European Congress, Estoril, Portugal, September 7–11.Google Scholar
  25. Gornitzka, Å., Kyvik, S., & Stensaker, B. (2005). Implementation Analysis in Higher Education. In A. Gornitzka, M. Kogan, & A. Amaral (Eds.), Reform and change in Higher Education (pp. 35–56). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. Gornitzka, Å. (2007). Historical legacies and new modes of governance in European higher education policy—The inception of the open method of coordination. In J. Enders & F. van Vught (Eds.), Towards a cartography of higher education policy change (pp. 165–172). Enschede: CHEPS/University of Twente Press.Google Scholar
  27. Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. (2001). Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kok, W. (2004). Facing the challenge. The Lisbon strategy for growth and employment. Report from the high level group chaired by Wim Kok. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
  29. Leuven/Louvain-la-Neuve Communiqué. (2009). The Bologna Process 2020—The European Higher Education Area in the new decade. Conference of Ministers responsible for higher education, Leuven/Louvain-la-Neuve, 28–29 April.Google Scholar
  30. London Communiqué. (2007). Towards the European Higher Education Area: Responding to challenges in a globalised world. Conference of Ministers responsible for higher education, London, 18 May.Google Scholar
  31. Marçal Grilo, E. (2003). European higher education society. Tertiary Education and Management, 9(1), 3–11.Google Scholar
  32. Martens, C., & Wolf, D. (2009). Boomerangs and Trojan horses: The unintended consequences of internationalising education policy through the EU and the OECD. In A. Amaral, G. Neave, C. Musselin, & P. Maassen (Eds.), European integration and the governance of higher education and research (pp. 81–108). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Neave, G., & Amaral, A. (2008). On process, progress, success and methodology or the unfolding of the Bologna Process as it appears to two reasonably benign observers. Higher Education Quarterly, 62(1–2), 40–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Neave, G., & Veiga, A. (2013). The Bologna Process: Inception, ‘take up’ and familiarity. Higher Education, 66(1), 59–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Prague Communiqué. (2001). Towards the European Higher Education Area. Conference of Ministers responsible for higher education, Prague, 19 May.Google Scholar
  36. Rosa, M., Veiga, A., & Amaral, A. (2004). Portugal. In J. Huisman & M. van der Wende (Eds.), On cooperation and competition (pp. 139–163). Bonn: Lemmens.Google Scholar
  37. Schomburg, H., & Teichler, U. (2011). Employability and mobility of bachelor graduates in Europe. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sin, C. (2012). Loose policy and local adaptation—A comparative study of master degrees in the context of the Bologna Process. Doctoral dissertation. Lancaster University, Lancaster.Google Scholar
  39. Sin, C. (2013). The devil in the detail: Contradictory national requirements and Bologna master degrees. Tertiary Education and Management, 19(1), 16–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sin, C. (2014). The policy object: A different perspective on policy enactment in higher education. Higher Education, 68(3), 435–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sin, C., Tavares, O., & Neave, G. (2015). Portugal: shaping student mobility, grappling with adversity. Paper presented at EAIR 37th Annual Forum, Krems, Austria, 30 August–2 September 2015.Google Scholar
  42. Teixeira, P. (2012). The changing public-private mix in higher education: Analysing Portugal’s apparent exceptionalism. In G. Neave & A. Amaral (Eds.), Higher education in Portugal 1974–2009—A nation, a generation (pp. 307–328). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  43. Veiga, A. (2010). Bologna and the institutionalisation of the European Higher Education Area. Doctoral dissertation, Universidade do Porto, Porto.Google Scholar
  44. Veiga, A. (2012). Bologna 2010. The moment of truth? European Journal of Education, 47(3), 378–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Veiga, A. (2014). Researching the Bologna Process through the lens of the policy cycle. In A. Teodoro & M. Guilherme (Eds.), European and Latin American higher education between mirrors (pp. 91–108). Rotterdam: SensePublishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Veiga, A., & Amaral, A. (2009). Policy implementation tools and European governance. In A. Amaral, G. Neave, C. Musselin, & P. Maassen (Eds.), European integration and governance of higher education and research (pp. 127–151). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  47. Veiga, A., & Neave, G. (2015). Managing the dynamics of the Bologna reforms: How institutional actors re-construct the policy framework. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23(59), 1–36.Google Scholar
  48. Veiga, A., Rosa, M., & Amaral, A. (2005). Institutional internationalisation strategies in a context of state inefficiency. In J. Huisman & M. Van der Wende (Eds.), On cooperation and competition II: Institutional responses to internationalisation, Europeanisation and globalisation (pp. 95–115). Bonn: Lemmens.Google Scholar
  49. Veiga, A., Rosa, M., & Amaral, A. (2006). The internationalisation of Portuguese higher education: How are higher education institutions facing this challenge? Higher Education Management, 18(1), 113–128.Google Scholar
  50. Vukasovic, M., Jungblut, J., & Elken, M. (2015). Still the main show in town? Assessing political saliency of the Bologna Process across time and space. Studies in Higher Education. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2015.1101755.Google Scholar
  51. Yerevan Communiqué. (2015). Yerevan Communiqué. Conference of Ministers responsible for higher education, Yerevan, 14–15 May.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cristina Sin
    • 1
  • Amélia Veiga
    • 1
  • Alberto Amaral
    • 1
  1. 1.CIPESMatosinhosPortugal

Personalised recommendations