Advertisement

Bologna Implementation and Its Objectives: Final Analysis in a Comparative Perspective

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

Abstract

This chapter brings together the insights gained after analysing the Bologna Process against a complex background of European policies and after looking into the effects of the Bologna Process on Portuguese higher education. How far has higher education in Portugal moved towards the political ambitions entertained at the European level regarding employability, mobility and attractiveness of European higher education? Portugal is used here as a conjunctural diagnostic instrument. The study’s most important findings are compared with literature about other European countries to determine how far the Portuguese experience mirrors issues elsewhere. We argue that policy success is not only dependent on political will or institutional endeavour, but the socioeconomic context plays a considerable role, either facilitating or hindering the pursuit of reforms. If we ignore it, we run the risk of misinterpreting the outcomes of policy and the reasons behind it, as well as misplacing the blame for underachievement.

Keywords

High Education Labour Market High Education System Lisbon Strategy European High Education Area 
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. Agència per a la Qualitat del Sistema Universitari de Catalunya. (2015). Universities and Employment in Catalonia 2014. Survey of the employment outcomes of the graduate population from Catalan universities. Barcelona: Agència per a la Qualitat del Sistema Universitari de Catalunya.Google Scholar
  2. Aiken, M. (2000). Reflexive modernisation and the social economy. Studies in Social and Political Thought, 2, 3–21.Google Scholar
  3. Alonso, L. E., Fernández, C. J., & Nyssen, J. M. (2009). El debate sobre las competencias. Una investigación cualitativa en torno a la educación superior e el mercado de trabajo en España. Madrid: Agencia Nacional de Evaluación de la Calidad y Acreditación.Google Scholar
  4. Amaral, A., & Veiga, A. (2012). The European Higher Education Area. Various perspectives on the complexities of a multi-level governance system. Educação, Sociedade e Culturas, 36, 25–48.Google Scholar
  5. Axencia para a Calidade do Sistema Universitario de Galicia (ACSUG). (2013). Estudio de la inserción laboral de los titulados en Másteres en el Sistema Universitario de Galicia 2007–2008, 2008–2009 y 2009–2010. Santiago de Compostela: ACSUG.Google Scholar
  6. Axencia para a Calidade do Sistema Universitario de Galicia (ACSUG). (2014). Estudo da inserción laboral dos titulados no sistema universitario de Galicia 2010–2011. Santiago de Compostela: ACSUG.Google Scholar
  7. Bacon, F. (1620). The New Organon. Or true directions concerning the interpretation of nature. Retrieved 28 December 2015, from http://www.constitution.org/bacon/nov_org.htm
  8. Barrett, B. (2013). Political economy influences on implementing the Bologna Process: Institutional change in higher education and the knowledge economy. Doctoral dissertation, University of Miami, Miami.Google Scholar
  9. Beck, U. (1986). Risikogesellschaft: Auf dem Weg in eine andere Moderne. Frankfurt: Surkamp Verlag.Google Scholar
  10. Beck, U., Giddens, A., & Lash, S. (1996). Reflexive Moderisierung: Eine Kontrovers. Frankfurt: Taschenbuch.Google Scholar
  11. Bell, D. (1973). The coming of post-industrial society: A venture in social forecasting. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  12. Bergen Communiqué. (2005). The European Higher Education Area—Achieving the Goals. Conference of Ministers responsible for higher education, Bergen, 19–20 May.Google Scholar
  13. Berlin Communiqué. (2003). Realising the European Higher Education Area. Conference of Ministers responsible for higher education, Berlin, 19 September.Google Scholar
  14. Bologna Declaration. (1999). The Bologna Declaration of 19 June 1999. Joint declaration of the European Ministers of Education. Bologna.Google Scholar
  15. 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
  16. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1970). La réproduction. Élements pour une théorie du système d’enseignment. Paris: Minuit.Google Scholar
  17. Brankovic, J., Kovacevic, M., Maassen, P., Stensaker, B., & Vukasovic, M. (Eds.). (2014). The Re-institutionalization of higher education in the Western Balkans: The interplay between European ideas, domestic policies, and institutional practices (Vol. 5). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  18. 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
  19. Bucharest 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
  20. Caballero, G., López, M. J., & Lampón, J.-F. (2014). Spanish Universities and their involvement with the employability of graduates. Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas, 146, 23–46.Google Scholar
  21. Camacho, C., & Medina, C. (2012). La aprobación del marco español de cualificaciones para la educación superior y la empleabilidad del alumnado universitario. REJIE: Revista Jurídica de Investigación e innovación Educativa, 5, 67–86.Google Scholar
  22. Cammelli, A., Antonelli, G., di Francia, A., Gasperoni, G., & Sgarzi, M. (2011). Mixed outcomes of the Bologna Process in Italy. In H. Schomburg & U. Teichler (Eds.), Employability and mobility of bachelor graduates in Europe (pp. 143–170). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Confederation of European Rectors’ Conferences and the Association of European Universities (CRE). (2000). The Bologna Declaration on the European space for higher education: An explanation. Retrieved 28 December 2015, from http://www.ifa.de/fileadmin/pdf/abk/inter/ec_bologna.pdf
  24. Creel, J., Laurent, E., & Le Cacheux, J. (2005). Delegation in inconsistency: The Lisbon strategy record as an Institutional Failure. Department d´études de l’ OFCE, Sciences Po. Retrieved 25 February 2015, from https://hal-sciencespo.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00972772/document
  25. Crozier, D., Purser, L., & Smidt, H. (2007). Trends V: Universities shaping the European Higher Education Area. Brussels: EUA.Google Scholar
  26. De Búrca, G. (1999). Reappraising subsidiarity’s significance after Amsterdam: Seminar and workshop on advanced issues in law and policy of the European Union, NAFTA and the WTO. Harvard JeanMonnet Working Paper 7/99, Harvard Law School, Cambridge, MA. Retrieved 28 December 2015, from http://ftp.infoeuropa.eurocid.pt/database/000036001-000037000/000036601.pd
  27. 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
  28. Dehousse, R. (2005). The Lisbon strategy: The costs of non-delegation. Paper presented at the workshop on Delegation and Multi-level Governance, Science Po, Paris. Retrieved 20 February 2012, from http://www.mzes.unimannheim.de/projekte/typo3/site/fileadmin/research%20groups/6/reader/Dehousse_Connex_Paris.pdf
  29. Department of Education and Training. (2013). Brains on the move. Mobility action plan 2013. Brussels: Department of Education and Training. Retrieved 9 December 2015, from http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/beleid/ActieplanMobiliteit/actieplan2013_english.pdf
  30. Dill, D., Teixeira, P., Jongbloed, B., & Amaral, A. (2004). Conclusion. In P. Teixeira, B. Jongbloed, D. Dill, & A. Amaral (Eds.), Markets in higher education. rhetoric or reality? (pp. 307–350). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  31. Drucker, F.P. (1969). The Age of Discontinuity. Guidelines to our Changing Society, New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  32. European Commission. (1991). Memorandum on Higher Education in the European Community, COM(91) 349 final. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
  33. European Commission. (2007). From Bergen to London—The contribution of the European Commission to the Bologna Process. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
  34. European Commission. (2015). What is horizon 2020?. Retrieved 28 December 2015, from http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/what-horizon-2020
  35. European Council. (2000) Presidency Conclusions, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/summits/lis1_en.htm (retrieved 27.05.2016)
  36. European Council. (2007). Modernising universities for Europe’s competitiveness in a global knowledge economy. Brussels: Council Resolution, Official Journal of the European Union.Google Scholar
  37. Fagforbundet. (2008). The EU services directive and the public services—A Norwegian perspective. Oslo: Fagforbundet.Google Scholar
  38. Figueiredo, H., Biscaia, R., Rocha, V., & Teixeira, P. (2015). Should we start worrying? Mass higher education, skill demand and the increasingly complex landscape of young graduates’ employment. Studies in Higher Education, pp. 1–20. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2015.1101754.Google Scholar
  39. Froment, E. (2007). Quality assurance and the Bologna and Lisbon objectives. In L. Bollaert, S. Brus, B. Curvale, L. Harvey, E. Helle, H. T. Jensen, J. Komlejnovic, A. Orphanides, & A. Sursock (Eds.), Embedding quality culture in higher education (pp. 11–13). Bruxelles: EUA.Google Scholar
  40. Gornitzka, Å. (2007). What is the use of Bologna in national reform? The case of Norwegian quality reform in higher education. In V. Tomusk (Ed.), Creating the European Area of Higher Education: Voices from the periphery (pp. 19–41). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Gornitzka, Å. (2009). Networking administration in areas of national sensitivity: The Commission and European higher education. In A. Amaral, G. Neave, C. Musselin, & P. Maassen (Eds.), European integration and governance of higher education and research (pp. 103–126). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  42. Guggenberger, H., Keplinger, M., & Unger, M. (2011). Moving to the Bologna structure: Facing challenges in the Austrian higher education system. In H. Schomburg & U. Teichler (Eds.), Employability and mobility of Bachelor graduates in Europe (pp. 43–67). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. (2001). An introduction to varieties of capitalism. In P. H. Hall & D. Soskice (Eds.), Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage (pp. 1–68). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hall, P.A., & Gingerich, D.W. (2004). Varieties of capitalism and institutional complementarities in the macroeconomy. MPlfG Discussion Paper No. 04/5, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, Köln.Google Scholar
  45. Haug, G., & Tauch, C. (2001). Towards the European Higher Education Area: Survey of the main reforms from Bologna to Prague. Geneva: Conférence des Recteurs Européens.Google Scholar
  46. Hawkins, D. G., Lake, D. A., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (Eds.). (2006). Delegation and agency in international organizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Heinze, T., & Knill, C. (2008). Analysing the differential impact of the Bologna Process: Theoretical considerations on national conditions for international policy convergence. Higher Education, 56(4), 493–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Holzinger, K., & Schimmelfennig, F. (2012). Differentiated integration in the European Union: Many concepts, sparse theory, few data. Journal of European Public Policy, 19(2), 292–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Iversen, T., & Wren, A. (1998). Equality, employment and budgetary restraint: The trilemma of the service economy. World Politics, 50(4), 507–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kassim, H., & Menon, A. (2002). The principal-agent approach and the study of the European Union: A provisional assessment. Working Paper Series, European Research Institute, University of Birmingham, Birmingham. Retrieved 17 March 2012, from http://www.download.bham.ac.uk/govsoc/eri/working-papers/wp01-menon-kassim.pdf
  51. Krücken, G. (2005) Hochschulen im wettbewerb: Eine untersuchung am beispiel der einführung von bachelor- und masterstudiengängen an deutschen universitäten (Report). Bielefeld: Department of Sociology, University of Bielefeld, Retrieved 17 March 2012, from http://www.uni-bielefeld.de/soz/personen/kruecken/ pdf/Hochschulen_im_Wettbewerb_EB.pdf
  52. Kwiek, M. (2004). The Emergent European Policies Under Scrutiny: the Bologna Process from a Central European Perspective, European Research Journal, 3(4), 759–776.Google Scholar
  53. Kwikkers, P., & van Wageningen, A. (2012). A space for the European Higher Education Area: The guidance from the EC Court of Justice to member states. Higher Education Policy, 25(1), 39–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lane, R. (1966). The decline of politics and ideology in a knowledgeable society. American Sociological Review, 31, 649–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 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
  56. 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
  57. Martens, K., & Wolf, K. 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 governance of higher education and research (pp. 77–102). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  58. Merton, R. (1942) The normative structure of science. Retrieved 21 December 2015, from http://www.panarchy.org/merton/science.html
  59. Ministerio de Educación. (2010). La Estrategia Universidad 2015, contribución de la Universidad al progreso socioeconómico español. Madrid: Gobierno de España, Ministerio de Educación.Google Scholar
  60. Mokyr, J. (2002). The knowledge society: Theoretical and historical underpinnings. Paper presented at Ad Hoc Expert Group on Knowledge Systems, United Nations, New York, September 4–5.Google Scholar
  61. Musselin, C. (2009). The side effects of the Bologna Process on national institutional settings. In A. Amaral, G. Neave, C. Musselin, & P. Maassen (Eds.), European integration and the governance of higher education and research (pp. 281–299). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  62. Neave, G. (2009). The Bologna Process as alpha or omega, or, on interpreting history and context as inputs to Bologna, Prague, Berlin and beyond. In A. Amaral, G. Neave, C. Musselin, & P. Maassen (Eds.), European integration and governance of higher education and research (pp. 15–54). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  63. Neave, G. (2012). The prince and his pleasure. Institutional autonomy, the evaluative state and re-engineering higher education in Western Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 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
  65. Neave, G., & Amaral, A. (2012). Introduction. On exceptionalism: The Nation, a generation and higher education, Portugal 1974–2009. In G. Neave & A. Amaral (Eds.), Higher education in Portugal 1974–2009—A nation, a generation (pp. 1–48). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  66. Neave, G., & Veiga, A. (2013). The Bologna Process: Inception, ‘take up’ and familiarity. Higher Education, 66(1), 59–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Olsen, J. P., & Maassen, P. (2007). European debates on the knowledge institution: The modernization of the university at the European level. In P. Maassen & J. P. Olsen (Eds.), University dynamics and European integration (pp. 3–22). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Orr, D., Gwosć, C., & Netz, N. (2011). Social and economic conditions of student life in Europe. Final Report. Eurostudent IV 2008–2011. Bielefeld: W. Bertelsmann Verlag.Google Scholar
  69. Petzold, K., & Peter, T. (2014). The social norm to study abroad: Determinants and effects. Higher Education, 69(6), 885–900.Google Scholar
  70. Ravinet, P. (2008). From voluntary participation to monitored coordination: Why European countries feel increasingly bound by their commitment to the Bologna Process. European Journal of Education, 43(3), 353–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Roxbhurgh, A. (s/d). A summary of Ulrich Beck—Risk Society: Towards a new modernity. Retrieved 30 October 2012, from http://nextreformation.com/wp-admin/resources/risk-society.pdf
  72. Rudder, H. (2010). Mission accomplished? Which mission? The ‘Bologna Process’—A view from Germany. Higher Education Review, 43(1), 3–20.Google Scholar
  73. Rüttgers, J. (2013). The Sorbonne/Bologna Project: Higher Education for the 21st Century. Keynote speech at the Second International Annual Conference of the Bologna Training Centre at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, 13 June.Google Scholar
  74. Schäfer, A. (2004). Beyond the community method: Why the open method of coordination was introduced to EU policy-making. European Integration Online Papers, 8(13), 1–19. Retrieved 27 January 2012, from http://eiop.or.at/eiop/pdf/2004-013.pdf
  75. Scharpf, F.W. (2006). Problem solving effectiveness and democratic accountability in the EU, IHS Political Science Series 107, Institute for Advanced Studies, Vienna.Google Scholar
  76. Schomburg, H., & Teichler, U. (Eds.) (2011). Employability and mobility of bachelor graduates in Europe, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  77. Schomburg, H. (2011). Employability and mobility of bachelor graduates: The findings of graduate surveys in ten European countries and impact of the Bologna reforms. In Schomburg and Teichler (Eds.) Employability and mobility of bachelor graduates, pp. 253–273, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  78. Sin, C. (2012). Academic understandings of and responses to Bologna: A three-country perspective. European Journal of Education, 47(3), 392–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sin, C., & Neave, G. (2014). Employability deconstructed: Perceptions of Bologna stakeholders. Studies in Higher Education. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2014.977859.Google Scholar
  80. Sin, C., & Saunders, M. (2014). Selective acquiescence, creative commitment and strategic conformity: Situated national policy responses to Bologna. European Journal of Education, 49(4), 529–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2003). Contested intellectual property: The role of the institution in the United States. In A. Amaral, V. L. Meek, & I. Larsen (Eds.), The higher education managerial revolution? (pp. 203–228). Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Sorbonne Declaration. (1998) Joint declaration on harmonization of the architecture of the European higher education system. Paris, the Sorbonne, May 25 1998. Retrieved from http://www.ehea.info/uploads/declarations/sorbonne_declaration1.pdf
  83. Stehr, N. (2010). Theories of the information age, in historical developments and theoretical approaches in sociology. Encyclopaedia of life support systems, UNESCO. Retrieved 28 December 2015, from http://www.eolss.net/sample-chapters/c04/E6-99A-42.pdf
  84. Streckeisen, P. (2009). Knowledge society—Or contemporary capitalism’s fanciest dress. Analyse & Kritik, 1, 181–197.Google Scholar
  85. Teichler, U. (2012). International student mobility in Europe in the context of the Bologna process. Journal of International Education and Leadership, 2(1), 1–13.Google Scholar
  86. Thomson, J. E. (1995). State sovereignty in international relations: Bridging the gap between theory and empirical research. International Studies Quarterly, 39(2), 213–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. UNESCO. (2015). Retrieved 30 October 2014, from http://www.uis.unesco.org/Education/Pages/default.aspx
  88. Veiga, A. (2010). Bologna and the institutionalisation of the European Higher Education Area. Doctoral dissertation, Universidade do Porto, Porto.Google Scholar
  89. 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. 127–152). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  90. Veiga, A., Magalhães, A., & Amaral, A. (2015). Differentiated integration and the Bologna Process. Journal of Contemporary European Research, 11(1), 84–102.Google Scholar
  91. Witte, J. K. (2006). Change of degrees and degrees of change: Comparing adaptations of European higher education systems in the context of the Bologna process. Doctoral dissertation, University of Twente, Enschede.Google Scholar
  92. 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