REFORMA DE LA EDUCACIÓN SUPERIOR EUROPEA:

EL PROCESO DE BOLONIA Y SUS MÚLTIPLES LECCIONES

Presentación

Este documento—concebido como un hipertexto—es una suerte de “caja de herramientas” sobre las políticas de transformación de la educación superior y la formación técnico-vocacional en curso en Europa y sus múltiples lecciones para la política pública en Chile y los países en vías de desarrollo.

Ofrece un amplio espectro de contenidos y recursos digitales—artículos, informes, libros en línea y sitios vinculados—disponibles ya bien en Internet o en la biblioteca virtual de FuturoLaboral, los cuales pueden ser utilizados con fines de información e ilustración sobre los cambios experimentados en los sistemas de educación superior de la Unión Europea, sus efectos y los debates que generan.

Responsables de este trabajo son los académicos y profesionales de la Escuela de Gobierno de la Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez, del Departamento de Ingeniería Industrial de la Universidad de Chile y del Ministerio de Educación que, bajo la coordinación de José Joaquín Brunner y Patricio Meller, conforman el equipo del Observatorio del Empleo de Graduados de la Educación Superior Chilena. La selección de los materiales, su ordenación y la interpretación que de ellos aquí se formula son responsabilidad exclusiva, sin embargo, de sus autores y del grupo de trabajo que elaboró este documento, conformado por José Joaquín Brunner, Gregory Elacqua, Paula Pacheco y Felipe Salazar.


Contexto

La estrategia central acordada por el Consejo de Europa en Lisboa, marzo del 2000, fue convertir a Europa en la más competitiva y dinámica economía basada en conocimientos del mundo, capaz de proporcionar crecimiento sostenido, con más y mejores empleos, y mayor cohesión social. Se llama a ésta la estrategia de Lisboa.

Para alcanzar este objetivo, los países de la Unión Europea se han propuesto llevar adelante una transformación fundamental de sus sistemas de educación y entrenamiento a través de un método abierto de coordinación. Textualmente, se señala que éste:

provides a new cooperation framework for the Member States with a view to convergence of national policies and the attainment of certain objectives shared by everyone. It is based essentially on:

-- identifying and defining jointly the objectives to be attained;

-- commonly-defined yardsticks (statistics, indicators) enabling Member States to know where they stand and to assess progress towards the objectives set;

-- comparative cooperation tools to stimulate innovation, the quality and relevance of teaching and training programmes (dissemination of "best practice", pilot projects, etc).

A tal efecto, los Ministros de Educación de estos países concordaron el año 2001 sobre un conjunto de objetivos específicos (PDF) para los sistemas de educación y formación, con el propósito de lograr los siguientes fines:

Los objetivos específicos acordados fueron los siguientes:

Mejorar la calidad y la eficacia de los sistemas de educación y formación en la Unión Europea

o       Garantizar el acceso de todos a las tecnologías de la información y la comunicación (TIC)

o        Aumentar la matriculación en los estudios científicos y técnicos

o        Aprovechar al máximo los recursos

Facilitar el acceso de todos a los sistemas de educación y formación

Abrir los sistemas de educación y formación a un mundo más amplio

Esta estrategia, comúnmente llamada Estrategia Educacional 2010 (PDF) fue posteriormente explicitada por el Consejo Europeo en torno a las siguientes metas para el año 2010:

En beneficio de los ciudadanos y de toda la Unión, se pretende alcanzar para 2010 lo siguiente en relación con la educación y la formación:

- que la educación y la formación se lleve al nivel más elevado, y hacer que se considere a

Europa como una referencia mundial por la calidad y la pertinencia de sus sistemas de educación y formación y de sus instituciones

- que los sistemas de educación y formación europeos sean lo suficientemente compatibles como para que los ciudadanos puedan pasar de uno a otro y aprovechar su diversidad

- que las personas que posean títulos y conocimientos adquiridos en cualquier lugar de la UE puedan convalidarlos efectivamente en toda la Unión a efectos de sus carreras y de la formación complementaria

- que los ciudadanos europeos de todas las edades tengan acceso a la educación permanente

- que Europa esté abierta a la cooperación, en beneficio mutuo de todas las demás regiones, y se convierta en el destino favorito de los estudiantes, eruditos e investigadores de otras zonas del mundo.

Para avanzar en esta dirección se han establecido una serie de  Grupos de Trabajo en torno a uno o más de estos objetivos, incluyendo un Grupo permanente encargado de facilitar el seguimiento sistemático del avance hacia las metas del 2010 mediante una serie apropiada de indicadores y estándares (PDF).

Por tanto, la estrategia educacional hacia el 2010 proporciona el marco general dentro del cual se desarrollan las diversas iniciativas de reforma, incluyendo en el caso de la educación superior el proceso de Bolonia, referido especialmente a la formación universitaria, y el proceso de Copenhague, referido a la enseñanza técnico-vocacional.

Una primera evaluación del progreso en la aplicación de la estrategia educacional 2010 fue realizado el año 2003 (Informe “Educación y Formación 2010: Urgen Las Reformas Para Coronar Con Éxito La Estrategia De Lisboa”), informe que luego, a comienzos del año 2004,  dio lugar a una propuesta de acuerdo (PDF) para acelerar la reforma de los sistemas de educación y formación de Europa.

Coetáneamente, la Comisión de las Comunidades Europeas dio a conocer, en febrero de 2003, una Comunicación sobre “El papel de las universidades en la Europa del conocimiento”, mediante el cual se busca promover el debate sobre el futuro de estas instituciones en la perspectiva de la estrategia de Lisboa.

Se señala allí que

El crecimiento de la sociedad del conocimiento depende de la producción de nuevos conocimientos, su transmisión a través de la educación y la formación, su divulgación a través de las tecnologías de la información y la comunicación y su empleo por medio de nuevos procedimientos industriales o servicios. Las universidades son únicas en este sentido, ya que participan en todos estos procesos a través del papel fundamental que desempeñan en los tres ámbitos siguientes: la investigación y la explotación de sus resultados, gracias a la cooperación industrial y el aprovechamiento de las ventajas tecnológicas, la educación y la formación, en particular la formación de los investigadores, y el desarrollo regional y local, al que pueden contribuir de manera significativa.

Al mismo tiempo, se constata que las universidades europeas no son competitivas a nivel mundial y enfrentan una serie de desafíos, tal como queda registrado en los siguientes párrafos:

Habida cuenta de su papel central, la creación de una Europa basada en el conocimiento representa para las universidades una fuente de oportunidades, pero también de considerables desafíos. Las universidades funcionan en un entorno cada vez más globalizado, en constante evolución, marcado por una creciente competencia para atraer y conservar a los más cualificados y por la aparición de nuevas necesidades, a las que están obligadas a responder. Sin embargo, las universidades europeas generalmente tienen menos atractivo y medios financieros que las de otros países desarrollados, concretamente las de los Estados Unidos.

Se plantea la cuestión de su capacidad para competir con las mejores universidades del mundo y garantizar un nivel de excelencia duradero. Esta cuestión cobra especial actualidad con la perspectiva de la ampliación, teniendo en cuenta la situación a menudo difícil de las universidades de los países candidatos, tanto en términos de recursos humanos como de dotaciones financieras.

A efectos de la aplicación de la Agenda de Lisboa, la Unión Europea ha iniciado una serie de acciones e iniciativas en los sectores de la investigación y la educación. Cabe mencionar en este sentido el Espacio Europeo de la Investigación, para la consecución del cual se acaban de abrir nuevas perspectivas y, en este contexto, el objetivo de incrementar el presupuesto de investigación y desarrollo europeos hasta alcanzar un 3 por ciento del PIB de la Unión de aquí al 2010.

En el ámbito de la educación y la formación, cabe citar la realización de un Espacio europeo del aprendizaje permanente, la aplicación del Programa de trabajo detallado para el seguimiento de los objetivos concretos de los sistemas de educación y formación en Europa, los trabajos destinados a reforzar la convergencia de los sistemas de enseñanza superior dentro del proceso de Bolonia y de los sistemas de formación profesional en consonancia con la declaración de Copenhague.


El proceso de Bolonia: hitos

 El año 1998, los Ministros de Educación de Alemania, Francia, Gran Bretaña e Italia dan a conocer la Declaración de la Sorbona (PDF)  en la cual por primera vez se plantea la necesidad de armonizar la arquitectura del sistema europeo de educación superior.

Se plantea allí lo siguiente:

Un área europea abierta a la educación superior trae consigo una gran riqueza de proyectos positivos, siempre respetando nuestra diversidad, pero requiere, por otra parte, el esfuerzo continuo que permita acabar con las fronteras y desarrollar un marco de enseñanza y aprendizaje. Se espera que, de ahora en adelante, éste favorezca una movilidad y una cooperación más estrechas.

El reconocimiento internacional y el atractivo potencial de nuestros sistemas residen en las facilidades de comprensión que éstos ofrecen en lo concerniente tanto a sus aspectos internos como externos. Parece estar emergiendo un sistema compuesto de dos ciclos, universitario y de posgrado, que servirá de piedra angular a la hora de establecer las comparaciones y equivalencias a escala internacional.

Gran parte de la originalidad y flexibilidad de este sistema se conseguirá mediante el sistema de créditos,como en el sistema ECTS, (Sistema Europeo de Transferencia de Créditos) y semestres. Esto permitirá la convalidación de los créditos obtenidos para aquellos que elijan una educación inicial o continua en alguna de las universidades europeas y, asimismo, tengan intención de obtener una titulación. De hecho, los estudiantes deberían ser capaces de acceder al mundo académico en cualquier momento de su vida profesional y desde diversos campos.

Se debería facilitar a los universitarios el acceso a gran variedad de programas, a oportunidades para llevar a cabo estudios multidisciplinares, al perfeccionamiento de idiomas y a la habilidad para utilizar las nuevas tecnologías informativas.

Es importante el reconocimiento internacional de la titulación de primer ciclo como un nivel de cualificación apropiado para el éxito de esta iniciativa, en la que deseamos ofrecer una visión clara de todos nuestros esquemas de educación superior.

En el ciclo de posgrado cabría la elección entre una titulación de máster de corta duración y una titulación de doctorado más extensa, con la posibilidad de cambiar entre uno y otro. En ambas titulaciones de posgrado, se pondría el énfasis apropiado tanto en la investigación como en el trabajo autónomo.

Tanto en el nivel universitario como en el de posgrado, se animaría a los estudiantes a pasar un semestre, como mínimo, en universidades ubicadas fuera de sus países. A su vez, habría más personal docente y dedicado a la investigación realizando sus actividades profesionales en otros países europeos diferentes a los de origen. El apoyo creciente a la Unión Europea, en lo que a la movilidad de estudiantes y profesores concierne, debería aprovecharse al máximo.

Muchos países, no sólo europeos, han tomado plena conciencia de la necesidad de fomentar dicha evolución. Las conferencias de rectores europeos, presidentes universitarios, y grupos de expertos y académicos de nuestros respectivos países se han embarcado en la tarea de análisis de estos objetivos.

El año pasado, en Lisboa, se acordó una convención que reconoce las cualificaciones obtenidas en educación superior en Europa dentro del campo académico. La convención estableció una serie de requisitos básicos y reconoció a cada país el derecho a tomar parte en un proyecto todavía más constructivo. Apoyándonos en estas conclusiones, podemos llevar a cabo una mejora y llegar más lejos. Actualmente ya existen más puntos en común para el reconocimiento mutuo de las titulaciones de educación superior en cuanto a propósitos profesionales a través de las respectivas directrices de la Unión Europea.

Nuestros gobiernos, sin embargo, todavía tienen que desempeñar un papel significativo mediante la promoción de medios que permitan la convalidación de los conocimientos adquiridos y el mejor reconocimiento de las respectivas titulaciones. Esperamos que todo esto promueva más acuerdos interuniversitarios. La armonización progresiva del marco general de nuestras titulaciones y ciclos puede lograrse a través de la consolidación de la experiencia ya existente, las titulaciones conjuntas, las iniciativas piloto y los diálogos en los que nos involucremos todos.

Posteriormente, el año 1999, los Ministros de Educación de Europa dan a conocer la Declaración de Bolonia (PDF), la cual plantea “la importancia de un desarrollo armónico de un Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior antes del 2010”.

La Declaración de Bolonia incluye entre sus principales objetivos:

Dos años más tarde, los Ministros de Educación de Educación signatarios de la Declaración de Bolonia se reúnen para estudiar el desarrollo alcanzado y para establecer direcciones y prioridades del proceso para los años venideros, las cuales quedan plasmadas en la Declaración de Praga.

En relación a los objetivos establecidos en la Declaración de Bolonia, los Ministros:

o        Alentaron fuertemente a las universidades y a otras instituciones de educación superior para que tomen una ventaja total de la existente legislación nacional y de las herramientas europeas propuestas para facilitar reconocimiento profesional y académico de las unidades del curso, grados y otros galardones, tal que los ciudadanos puedan efectivamente usar sus cualificaciones, competencias y habilidades a lo largo del Área de Educación Superior Europea. En tal sentido apelaron a las organizaciones existentes y a las redes tales como NARIC y ENIC para promover, a un nivel europeo, nacional e institucional, un simple, eficiente y claro reconocimiento que refleje la diversidad subyacente de las cualificaciones.

o        Advirtieron con satisfacción que el objetivo de una estructura de niveles basada en dos ciclos principales, articulando la educación superior en estudios de diplomatura (pregrado) y licenciatura (postgrado), ha sido abordada y discutida. Algunos países ya han adoptado esta estructura y algunos otros están considerándola con gran interés. Es importante señalar que en muchos países los grados de licenciatura y maestría, o comparable a dos grados de ciclo, pueden ser obtenidos en universidades al igual que en otras instituciones de educación superior. Los programas que conducen a un título pueden, y en verdad deberían, tener diferentes orientaciones y varios perfiles para acomodar una diversidad de necesidades individuales, académicas y de mercado laboral tal y como se concluyó en el seminario de Helsinki en las titulaciones universitarias (Febrero del 2001) (ver más adelante).

o        Hicieron hincapié en que, para una mayor flexibilidad en los procesos de aprendizaje y calificación, es necesaria la adopción de piedras angulares comunes de calificaciones, sostenidas por un sistema de créditos tal como el ECTS o uno que sea compatible con el ECTS, proporcionando tanto funciones de transferibilidad como de acumulación. Conjuntamente con los sistemas que garantizan la calidad reconocida mutuamente tales arreglos facilitarán el acceso de estudiantes al mercado laboral europeo y mejorarán la compatibilidad, el atractivo y la competitividad de la educación superior europea. El uso generalizado de tal sistema de créditos y del Suplemento del Diploma fomentará el progreso en esta dirección.

o        Reafirmaron que el objetivo de mejorar la movilidad de estudiantes, profesores, investigadores y personal administrativo, como se estableció en la Declaración de Bolonia, es de suma importancia. Por tanto, confirmaron su compromiso de reivindicar la eliminación de todos los obstáculos para el libre movimiento de estudiantes, profesores, investigadores y personal administrativo e hicieron énfasis en la dimensión social de la movilidad.

o        Reconocieron el papel vital que juegan los sistemas que garantizan la calidad en asegurar los estándares de la alta calidad y en facilitar la comparabilidad de las calificaciones en toda Europa. En tal sentido llamaron a fomentar una cooperación más cercana entre redes que aseguren la calidad y el reconocimiento. Hicieron hincapié en la necesidad de una cercana cooperación europea y una mutua confianza en ella y la aceptación de sistemas que aseguren la calidad nacional. Además animaron a las universidades y a otras instituciones de educación superior a difundir ejemplos de la mejor práctica y a diseñar escenarios para una aceptación mutua de mecanismos de evaluación y acreditación/certificación. Los Ministros apelaron a las universidades y a otras instituciones de educación superior, a agencias estatales y a la Red Europea de Garantía de Calidad en la Educación Superior (ENQA), en cooperación con los cuerpos correspondientes de otros países los cuales no son miembros de ENQA, a colaborar en el establecimiento de un marco de trabajo común de referencia y a difundir la mejor práctica.

El año 2003, los Ministros de Educación volvieron a reunirse con el objetivo de analizar el progreso efectuado, y para establecer prioridades y nuevos objetivos para los años siguientes, con vista a acelerar la realización del área de Educación Superior Europea.

En esta oportunidad, en la Declaración de Berlín de septiembre de 2003, formularon las siguientes consideraciones, principios y prioridades:

Garantía de calidad. La calidad de la educación superior es el corazón del establecimiento del área de Educación Superior Europea. Los ministros se comprometieron a apoyar el desarrollo de la calidad a niveles institucionales, nacionales y europeos. Señalaron la necesidad de desarrollar criterios compartidos y metodologías dirigidas a la garantía de la calidad. Así mismo, señalan que junto a la consistencia con el principio de autonomías institucionales, la responsabilidad primera para la garantía de calidad en la educación superior yace con cada institución en sí misma y esto proporciona la base para la responsabilidad del sistema académico en el marco de calidad nacional. Por tanto, acordaron que para 2005 los sistemas de garantía de calidad nacionales deberían incluir:

A nivel europeo, ENQA, en cooperación con EUA, EURASHE y ESIB, desarrollarán y acordarán conjuntos de procedimientos y guías para la garantía de la calidad, del mismo modo, explorarán distintos caminos para asegurar un sistema adecuado de revisión de dicha garantía de calidad, así como la acreditación de agencias o cuerpos, y la elaboración informes sobre la próxima reunión de seguimiento de los ministros en 2005.

Adopción de un sistema basado en dos ciclos principales. Después de la declaración de Bolonia para establecer un sistema de dos ciclos, los Ministros notaron con cierta satisfacción, que el paisaje europeo de educación superior se está reestructurando. Los Ministros se comprometieron a comenzar con la implantación del sistema de dos ciclos en el 2005. Los Ministros subrayan la importancia de consolidar los progresos realizados, así como de mejorar el entendimiento y la aceptación de nuevas calificaciones para reforzar el diálogo entre instituciones, y entre instituciones y empleados. Los Ministros retaron a los estados miembros a elaborar un marco de calificaciones comparables y compatibles, para sus sistemas de educación superior. Dicho marco debería describir las calificaciones en términos de trabajo realizado, nivel, aprendizaje, competencias y perfil. Del mismo modo deben elaborar un marco de calificaciones para el área de Educación Superior Europea. Dentro de esos marcos, las carreras deberían tener definidos diferentes objetivos. Las licenciaturas de primer y segundo ciclo, deberían tener diferentes orientaciones y diversos perfiles para acomodarse a la diversidad de perfiles académicos, y necesidades del mercado de trabajo. Las titulaciones de primer grado deberían dar acceso, en el sentido de la Convención de Lisboa, a los programas de segundo ciclo. Las titulaciones de segundo grado, deberían dar acceso a estudios de doctorado. Los ministros invitaron al grupo de seguimiento a investigar si la educación superior de corta duración, debe estar ligada al marco de calificaciones de primer ciclo para el área de Educación Superior Europea y señalaron su compromiso de hacer la Educación Superior accesible a todos, según su capacidad.

Promoción de la movilidad. La movilidad de los estudiantes, y del personal académico y administrativo es la base para el establecimiento de un área de Educación Superior Europea. Los Ministros enfatizan su importancia por razones académicas, culturales, políticas, sociales así como esferas económicas. Los Ministros observaron con cierta satisfacción que desde su última reunión, las figuras de movilidad han incrementado gracias al soporte sustancial de los programas de la unión europea, y acordaron efectuar los pasos necesarios para la mejora de la calidad y el aumento de la movilidad estudiantil. Reafirmaron su intención de realizar todos los esfuerzos necesarios para eliminar todos los obstáculos relacionados con la movilidad dentro del área de Educación Superior Europea. Con la vista en la promoción de la movilidad estudiantil, los Ministros darán los pasos necesarios para facilitar el acceso a préstamos y becas.

Establecimiento de un sistema de créditos. Los Ministros señalan el importante papel del Sistema de Transferencia de Crédito Europeo (ECTS) para facilitar la movilidad de los estudiantes redundando en el desarrollo de un currículum internacional. Se dieron cuenta de que ECTS se está convirtiendo poco a poco en una base para los sistemas de crédito nacionales. Así mismo animan a que se produzcan más progresos con el objetivo de que ECTS se convierta no solo en un sistema de transferencia, sino en un sistema de acumulación, para que se aplique de una forma consistente dentro de la emergente área de Educación Superior Europea.

Reconocimiento de carreras. Los Ministros subrayan la importancia de la convención de reconocimiento de Lisboa, que debería ser ratificada por todos los países participantes en el proceso de Bolonia, y emplazan a ENIC y NARIC con las autoridades nacionales competentes para la continuar con la implementación de los términos acordados en dicha convención. Establecen el objetivo de que cada estudiante que finalice su carrera a partir de 2005, debería recibir el Suplemento del Diploma automática y gratuitamente. Dicho diploma se debería repartir en un amplio abanico de idiomas europeos. Pretenden que las instituciones y los empleados den sin ningún tipo de problema el Suplemento del Diploma, para aprovecharse de la transparencia y la flexibilidad de los sistemas de educación superior, fomentando así, el encuentro de trabajo y facilitando el reconocimiento académico en caso de que se desee seguir avanzando con los estudios.

Adicionalmente, en esta reunión los Ministros de Educación europeos resaltaron dos temas adicionales dentro de la perspectiva del proceso de Bolonia:

Aprendiendo toda la vida. Subrayaron la importante contribución de la educación superior al aprendizaje para toda la vida. Llevarán a cabo los pasos necesarios para alinear sus políticas nacionales a este objetivo y urgen a las instituciones de educación superior a abrir las posibilidades para un aprendizaje para toda la vida. Asimismo, hicieron énfasis en la necesidad de mejora de las oportunidades para todos los ciudadanos, en concordancia con sus aspiraciones y habilidades, para seguir los caminos de aprendizaje de toda la vida dentro de la educación superior.

 

Área de investigación europea. Conscientes de la necesidad de promocionar vínculos más cercanos entre el espacio común europeo de educación superior y el área de investigación europea en una Europa del conocimiento, y de la importancia de la investigación como una parte integral de la educación superior en toda Europa, los ministros consideran necesario incluir el nivel de doctorado como el tercer ciclo en el proceso de Bolonia. Hacen énfasis en la importancia de la investigación y el proceso de training y la promoción de la interdisciplina en mantener y mejorar la calidad y en alcanzar la competitividad de la educación superior más generalmente. Pidieron incrementar la movilidad en los niveles de doctorado y postdoctorado y animaron a las instituciones a incrementar sus operaciones en estudios de doctorado y el training para jóvenes investigadores. Además pidieron a las instituciones de educación superior incrementar su rol y relevancia en la investigación tecnológica, social y cultural, así como en todo lo relacionado con las necesidades de la sociedad. Asumen que esto requiere un fuerte apoyo, incluyendo financiación, y decisiones apropiadas desde los gobiernos nacionales y cuerpos europeos.

En el mes de mayo del año 2005, los Ministros de Educación de 40 países europeos que ahora suscriben la Declaración de Bolonia volverán a reunirse, esta vez en la ciudad noruega de Bergen, ocasión en la cual se volverán a revisar los progresos en la  implementación del Proceso de Bolonia y las acciones necesarias para asegurar los objetivos de la estrategia educacional 2010.


Países miembros del proceso de Bolonia (nombre inglés)

Albania

Latvia

Andorra

Liechtenstein

Austria

Lithuania

Belgium

Luxembourg

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Malta

Bulgaria

Netherlands

Croatia

Norway

Cyprus

Poland

Czech Republic

Portugal

Denmark

Romania

Estonia

Russian Federation

Finland

Serbia and Montenegro

France

Slovak Republic

Germany

Slovenia

Greece

Spain

Holy See

Sweden

Hungary

Switzerland

Iceland

"the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia"

Ireland

Turkey

Italy

United Kingdom

 

Miembros plenos adicionales:

European Commission

 

Miembros consultativos:

Council of Europe

EURASHE

ESIB

European University Association (EUA)

UNESCO-CEPES

  
 

Sitios en la Red de organizaciones referidas directamente al proceso de Bolonia

ENQA 

EURYDICE

   

Sitios Bolonia de miembros que postulan a ser miembros del Proceso de Bolonia

Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine

   

Legislación europea sobre educación superior: Por favor pinche aquí

 

Consejos Nacionales de Conferencias de RectoresNational de países signatarios: Por favor pinche aquí

 

Asociaciones europeas e internacionales de estudiantes: Por favor pinche aquí

 

Otras organizaciones europeas relevantes: Por favor pinche aquí

 

Otros sitios de interés: Por favor pinche aquí

 

 Fuente: http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/


Estado de avance en la implementación del Proceso de Bolonia: por países

Albania

Latvia

Andorra

Liechtenstein

Austria

Lithuania

Belgium

Luxembourg

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Malta

Bulgaria

Netherlands

Croatia

Norway

Cyprus

Poland

Czech Republic

Portugal

Denmark

Romania

Estonia

Russian Federation

Finland

Serbia and Montenegro

France

Slovak Republic

Germany

Slovenia

Greece

Spain

Holy See

Sweden

Hungary

Switzerland

Iceland

"the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia"

Ireland

Turkey

Italy

United Kingdom

Fuente:  http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/

§                     Información adicional puede encontrarse en:

National Trends in the Bologna Process - Eurydice


Estado de avance en la implementación del Proceso de Bolonia: revisión de académicos y expertos

Hay una serie de documentos fundamentales que dan cuenta del progreso, y de los obstáculos, en la implementación del Proceso de Bolonia, los cuales han servido de base para el análisis de las autoridades gubernamentales a nivel nacional y comunitario. De particular importancia son los tres documentos de Tendencias (Trends) que se han preparado en sucesivos momentos, los cuales analizan detalladamente la forma como en los diferentes países miembros se han ido aplicando cada uno de los objetivos del Proceso diseñado en Bolonia, alimentados y ampliados en las reuniones posteriores de Praga y Berlín. Los principales documentos son los siguientes:

Lourtie Report  - From Bologna to Prague (PDF)

http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/Docs/00-Main_doc/0105Lourtie_report.pdf

Zgaga Report - From Prague to Berlin (PDF)

http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/Docs/00-Main_doc/0309ZGAGA.PDF

Trends I (1999) (PDF)

http://www.eua.be/eua/jsp/en/upload/OFFDOC_BP_trend_I.1068715136182.pdf 

Trends II  (2001) (PDF)

http://www.eua.be/eua/jsp/en/upload/OFFDOC_BP_trend_II.1068715483262.pdf

Trends III (2003) (PDF)

http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/Docs/00-Main_doc/0307TRENDS_III.PDF

Salamanca Convention (2001) (PDF)

http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/Docs/00-Main_doc/010329-30SALAMANCA_CONVENTION.PDF

Graz Declaration (EUA) : “Después de Berlín: El Papel de las Universidades” (2003) (PDF); documento de la Asoción Europea de Universidades

http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/Docs/02-EUA/0309Graz_publication.pdf  

El siguiente artículo breve, de un directivo de la Asociación Europea de Universidades, ofrece una visión reflexiva y crítica del desarrollo del proceso de Bolonia y de las conclusiones y recomendaciones formuladas en los Informes de Tendencias I, II y III y señala las expectativas de las universidades europeas en relación al informe Trends IV (en preparación).

Progress towards the European Higher Education Area: What Trends reports are telling us...

by David Crosier, Senior Programme Manager, EUA

Each of the three Conferences of European Ministers of Education that has contributed to the construction of a European Higher Education Area by 2010 has been informed by a report of trends in European higher education. The first report, Trends in Learning Structures in Higher Education

(Trends I), prepared for the now famous 1999 meeting in Bologna that launched the process, was instrumental in setting the objectives outlined in the Bologna Declaration. Trends II (2001) presented in Prague in 2001, played a major role in broadening the geographic and thematic scope of the Bologna Process. It concentrated principally on an analysis of national structures, as did Trends 1, while the third and most recent report EUA prepared for Berlin “Trends 2003: progress towards the European Higher Education Area”, reflected for the first time the views of higher education institutions and their students. For this reason it has done much to raise awareness of issues now at the forefront of many current national higher education debates such as: how best to implement the reforms? Are they supported by the key stakeholders? How does one national situation compare to another? What is really happening inside our universities To what extent is the elusive “European Dimension” really the guiding force behind national reform processes?

Trends III – an EUA bestseller

Of the three reports, there is no doubt that Trends III has been the most widely read among the higher education community. The report, written by Sybille Reichert and Christian Tauch for the EUA, has become an overnight success, with copies being requested each week from institutions as far afield as Vladivostock in north-east Russia to Faro in south-west Portugal. Five months after the Berlin Conference, there is no sign of a slow-down in demand.

One explanation of such high interest is its clear focus on higher education institutions themselves rather than on national structures. Trends III deliberately canvassed and compared the views of different higher education actors and stakeholders (National Ministries, Rectors’ Conferences, students, employers and most importantly over 800 individual higher education institutions) on the same Bologna issues.

“Around 45% of higher education institutions in 40 countries responded to the Trends III questionnaire, which is an astounding result for a European survey, and a clear indication that higher education institutions are ready and willing to play their role in Europe very responsibly” commented Eric Froment, President of the EUA.

Bologna Process implementation– some food for thought

For unconditional enthusiasts of the Bologna Process, however, Trends III does not always make comfortable reading. The nature of the reform process – with each country moving in its own way towards a common, but somewhat elusive, goal – has understandably sometimes generated confusion and thrown up contradictions. In terms of core reforms, such as the introduction of a two cycle degree system, debate and discussion on the direction of reform, of course, reflects the diversity of national systems, culture and traditions. Hence reforms which are intended to improve transparency by using common terminology may sometimes inadvertently muddy the picture. For example, while some countries have decided to introduce a first-cycle bachelor qualification to be awarded after 180 ECTS credits (three years), others have opted for new first-level bachelor qualification awarded after 240 ECTS credits (four years). And if first-level qualifications are differently understood, what does this imply for second-level qualifications?

In addition this impacts on mobility issues. Is it possible to encourage more vertical mobility (i.e. from one institution to another between first and second level studies – studying a masters in a different country from where the bachelors was completed) if the length of first and second study cycles are different? How much room for diversity of curriculum contents is feasible within first or second level degree programmes if institutions are trying to encourage mobility within the course of a study programme?

Such questions are just a tiny sample of the issues being discussed within and across institutions as Bologna reforms “progress”.

Trends III also highlighted some interesting paradoxes. While the Bologna Process is often simplistically and mistakenly portrayed as moving European higher education systems closer to

Anglo-Saxon traditions, responses to Trends III questionnaires indicate that the UK higher education community is the least aware or involved of the forty countries. Tish Bourke, Manager of Europe Unit for Universities UK, responded:

"Trends III has reinforced the need for UK engagement in the Bologna Process. We hope that by increasing awareness of European issues, the UK HE Europe Unit will bring about greater institutional understanding of the EHEA reforms. The publication of Trends IV will hopefully find the UK higher education sector contributing to the debate by providing examples of good practice and by generally playing a more involved role"

Stocktaking: new concept for Trends IV

In Berlin, the European education ministers decided that a process of monitoring and evaluation of reforms is essential, and that the results of this exercise should inform their next conference in Bergen, in May 2005. This so-called “stocktaking exercise” is yet to be fully defined, but EUA will contribute by following up the Trends III report with a new concept for Trends IV. The intention is not to repeat the Trends III exercise, but to aim for a different kind of report, as Lesley Wilson, Secretary General of EUA explains:

“Trends III has really involved higher education institutions, and has shown that the Bologna Process cannot achieve its goals unless the Declarations of Ministers are translated into concrete action which is developed and implemented within higher education institutions. However, there would be little point in repeating the Trends III data collection so soon after the report has been published, as the data from 2002/3 still remains relevant and valid. EUA’s task now is to go more deeply into universities and to find out what is really happening from the point of view of all the stakeholders and actors – students, academic and administrative staff, as well as institutional leaders. While Trends III gave us the impressions of institutions, with Trends IV we want to test the reality of these reform processes on the ground.”

Trends IV: an in-depth look at Bologna reforms

EUA will be drawing upon the support of both Rectors Conferences and individual higher education institutions to produce the Trends IV report. At national level Rectors Conferences will be able to provide the latest information on the key “intermediate priorities” of the Bologna Process agreed in

Berlin, i.e. reforms in degree structures, recognition processes and defining the European dimension of quality assurance. National Rectors Conferences will also play a key role in selecting a sample of higher education institutions to take part in a comparative research project on the implementation of Bologna reforms.

The intention is to undertake a series of institutional site visits, looking in-depth at a range of institutions endeavouring to reform their policies, structures and practices to play a leading role in the European higher education area. The research aim will be to understand the problems being faced by different actors in universities, and to assess where improvements need to be made - whether at institutional, national or European level.

Trends IV will certainly not be the only report providing information to Ministers in Bergen.

Governmental representatives in the Bologna process are also very keen to undertake their own stocktaking exercise, assessing the progress that has been made in their countries and the tasks which remain. This news should be welcomed as a sign of commitment and responsibility to the Bologna Process. Yet, without a strong focus on institutions, such an exercise could be superficial.

The Trends IV project has been conceived in the belief that is impossible to assess the impact and effectiveness of higher education reforms without looking in detail at the institutions where reforms must take root. As Lesley Wilson explains:

“We are aware that any methodology in a Europe-wide stocktaking exercise has its limits, and Trends IV will consciously offer qualitative rather than quantitative information. The report won’t tell us what everyone is thinking about Bologna reforms, but it should provide some comparable views from institutions in all forty Bologna countries.” 

Fuente: Spring 2004 Forum, vol. 6, no.1


Información sobre los objetivos específicos del Proceso de Bolonia

Se recordará que los principales objetivos iniciales y luego ampliados del Proceso de Bolonia son los siguientes:

1. Un sistema fácilmente legible y comparable de titulaciones y el Suplemento al Diploma

One of the major obstacles for people wanting to work or learn in another EU country, or indeed to move between different parts of the labour market, is that their qualifications and competences may not be accepted. This is further complicated by the proliferation of qualifications world-wide, the diversity of national qualification systems and education and training structures, and constant changes in these systems. To tackle these obstacles, the EU has introduced several instruments, aiming at facilitating the transfer of qualifications and competences for academic or professional purposes.

The broader long-term aim outlined by the Commission in its Communication on ‘Making a European Area of Lifelong Learning a Reality’ is to enable people to meet the challenges of the knowledge-based society by promoting the development of their knowledge and competences at all stages of their lives. Citizens should be empowered to use their qualifications and competences as a kind of common currency, which can be earned in one setting, and spent in another. The validation of ‘non-formal learning’, which may be acquired for example in the workplace or through voluntary activity, is a crucial element of lifelong learning, enabling citizens to build on knowledge and skills wherever they are acquired. The European programmes Leonardo da Vinci and Socrates/Grundtvig have been key in supporting lifelong learning and the development of transnational vocational education and training.

Transparency and recognition for academic purposes

The network of National Academic Recognition Information Centres (NARICs), created at the Commission's initiative in 1984, covers all EU and European Economic Area Member States and all the associated countries in Central and Eastern Europe, Cyprus and Malta. These centres provide authoritative advice and information on the academic recognition of diplomas and periods of study undertaken abroad. A parallel network, ENICs, was set up by the Council of Europe and UNESCO-CEPES, and the joint NARIC-ENIC network covers a broad framework of countries.

Other instruments aiming at transparency of qualifications consist of the European Credit Transfer System, introduced by the Commission more than 10 years ago as a common basis for recognising students' study periods abroad. The ECTS continues to expand, even beyond Europe. The Commission, the Council of Europe and UNESCO have jointly developed a Diploma Supplement which includes both a graduate's personal achievements and a description of his or her national higher education system. The Diploma Supplement is now starting to be widely implemented across Europe.

Moreover, education ministers in more than 30 countries have resolved, under the Bologna Process, to create a 'European higher education area' by 2010 in which degrees would be more readily comparable.

Transparency and recognition for professional purposes

The Commission and the Member States have developed a number of tools supporting transfer and transparency of qualifications and competences. A network of National Reference Points for vocational qualifications is currently being set up in the Member States and will be the first point of contact for questions relating to vocational qualifications.

The Certificate Supplement for vocational qualifications, has been developed in parallel to the Diploma supplement in higher education, and is currently (2002) being tested in the Member States. Furthermore, a common European format for Curriculum Vitae (CV) has been recommended by the Commission, aiming at a simple and efficient presentation of individual qualifications and competences. A further instrument, the Europass assists and promotes mobility within work-linked training by providing a voluntary Europe-wide means of recording periods of training outside the ‘home’ Member State.

As part of the ‘Bruges process’ of increased cooperation in vocational education and training, the intention is to develop an integrated strategy, bringing together into a single, user friendly tool, the above mentioned instruments for transparency of certificates and diplomas. The Bruges process responds to the Barcelona mandate to make European education and training a world reference by 2010. It supports the development of transparency and mutual trust as the principles underpinning improved recognition of qualifications and competences, as well as the quality of European vocational education and training, in terms of standing and reputation. This process is being developed ‘bottom up’ with the full involvement of the social partners, and will support the development of qualifications and competences at sectoral level.  The Council of the European Union approved a Resolution (12-11-02) on the promotion of enhanced European co-operation in vocational education and training, giving a formal mandate to pursue the objectives developed under this process.

Professional recognition in the regulated professions is covered by a set of directives specifying the rights of individual citizens in the field of qualifications. This set of directives will in the near future be replaced by one single directive covering all regulated professions.

More  links:

*Professional recognition: FAQ
*Higher education in Europe
*Europe Direct
*The European centre for the development of vocational training – CEDEFOP

Fuente: http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/policies/rec_qual/rec_qual_en.html

Sobre el suplemento al diploma (PDF), el Consejo de Europa señala lo siguiente:

The Diploma Supplement (DS) is a document attached to a higher education diploma aiming at improving international ‘transparency’ and at facilitating the academic and professional recognition of qualifications (diplomas, degrees, certificates etc.). It is designed to provide a description of the nature, level, context, content and status of the studies that were pursued and successfully completed by the individual named on the original qualification to which this supplement is appended. It should be free from any value-judgements, equivalence statements or suggestions about recognition. It is a flexible non-prescriptive tool which is designed to save time, money and workload. It is capable of adaptation to local needs.

The DS is produced by national institutions according to a template that has been developed by a Joint European Commission - Council of Europe - UNESCO working party that tested and refined it.

The DS is composed of eight sections (information identifying the holder of the qualification, information identifying the qualification, information on the level of the qualification, information on the contents and results gained, information on the function of the qualification, additional information, certification of the Supplement, information on the national higher education system). Information in all eight sections should be provided. Where information is not provided, an explanation should give the reason why. Institutions have to apply to the DS the same authentication procedures as for the diploma itself.

A description of the national higher education system within which the individual named on the original qualification graduated has to be attached to the DS. This description is provided by the National Academic Recognition Information Centres (NARICs) and is available on the website: www.enic-naric.net

What it is not:

What does the diploma supplement offer to the students?

What does the diploma supplement offer to higher education institutions?

Why is the diploma supplement needed?

New qualifications proliferate worldwide and countries are constantly changing their qualification systems and educational structures under the impact of rapid economic, political and technological change. An increasing number of mobile citizens are seeking the fair recognition of their qualifications. The non-recognition and poor-evaluation of qualifications is now a global problem. Since original credentials alone do not provide sufficient information, it is very difficult to gauge the level and function of a qualification without detailed appropriate explanation.

The Diploma Supplement is a response to these challenges since:

·         It promotes transparency in higher education.

·         It accommodates rapid changes in qualifications.

·         It aids mobility, access and lifelong learning.

·         It promotes fair and informed judgements about qualifications.

Fuente: http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/policies/rec_qual/recognition/diploma_en.html

2. Adopción de un sistema basado, fundamentalmente, en dos ciclos principales: pregrado y grado

Los Informes Trends I, II y III, así como también el Informe Lourtie (ver más arriba) contienen todos valiosa información sobre la forma como se está implementando este objetivo del Proceso de Bolonia a nivel nacional. Asimismo, pueden consultarse los análisis y las conclusiones del 2003 Danish Bologna Seminar (PDF, 170 KB) sobre estructuras de cualificación en el concierto europeo.

Respecto del grado de bachiller, el seminario realizado en Helsinki en Febrero de 2001 concluyó lo siguiente:


Benefits of developing bachelor-level degrees

These conclusions concern first degrees or first cycle degrees commonly referred to as bachelor-level degrees. For the sake of clarity, the term bachelor-level degree will be used in this document.

Most European countries have, are introducing or are planning to introduce a higher education degree structure based on a sequence of bachelor, master and doctoral degrees. Reforms in this direction have been carried out in countries with unitary higher education system as well as in countries with binary or dual higher education systems.

Long first study cycles, high drop-out rates and the lengthening of university studies are problems shared by many European countries. Well-planned and efficiently realised bachelor degree programmes help reduce the number of students discontinuing their studies without any qualification and thus facilitates their placement in the labour market while possibly contributing to shortening overall study times. There is a considerable lack of comparability in the European degree structures which is an impediment to mobility.

The bachelor-master (two-tier) structure offers several advantages in comparison with the long, often rather inflexible curricula leading straight up to the master level which have been traditional in many countries. A main benefit is that students can be offered programmes which allow more easily individual flexibility, which also promotes mobility. The two-tier structure makes room for national and international mobility by contributing to the modularisation of study programmes. In the age of life-long learning one of the most significant factors speaking in favour of a two-tier structure is that it allows interaction between studies and working life.

Most of the professionally oriented higher education institutions offer at the moment bachelor-level degrees, and in many countries master-level degrees are being introduced to these institutions. This development may serve the purpose of diversification of higher education provision. It may also contribute to the efficient use of resources because students do not need to change their orientation at the transition point.

The bachelor/master structure has become a world standard. Its adoption will facilitate better recognition of European degrees both within Europe and in the world and will make it more attractive for international students to consider studying in Europe.

Framework for bachelor-level degrees in Europe

The promotion of mobility in Europe requires increased transparency and comparability of European higher education qualifications. In order to achieve this need some common criteria for the definition of bachelor degrees are needed. This framework should be flexible enough to allow national variations, but at the same time clear enough to serve as a definition. These broad definitions should be achieved already in the Prague Summit of Higher Education.

The following factors could be seen as useful common denominators for a European bachelor-level degree:

Bachelor-level degree is a higher education qualification the extent of which is 180 to 240 credits (ECTS). It normally takes three to four years of full-time study to complete the degree. Bachelor-level degrees play an important role in the life-long learning paradigm and learning to learn skills should be an essential part of any bachelor-level degree.
It is important to note that the bachelor-level degrees, often referred to as first degrees can be taken at either traditional universities or at professionally-oriented higher education institutions. Programmes leading to the degree may, and indeed should have different orientations and various profiles in order to accommodate a diversity of individual, academic and labour market needs.

In order to increase transparency it is important that the specific orientation and profile and learning outcomes of a given qualification are included in its title and explained on the Diploma Supplement issued to the student. Information on different study programmes should be transparent to enable the students make informed choices.
Even bachelor degrees which serve as an intermediate qualification preparing students for further study should be based on a proper curriculum. They should not only be seen as a part of a longer curriculum, as some students may wish to change direction or to choose a graduate programme or specialisation offered at another institution.

Labour market relevance

In the European tradition higher education has never been an island. There is a strong need for close interaction between higher education and society at large. Labour market relevance should not undermine higher education's cultural value.

There are many different ways in which bachelor-type degrees can be relevant to the common European labour market. While many curricula ought to be geared towards specific professions and immediate entrance onto the labour market, others need to prepare students for further studies and a later entrance. All curricula should include transversal skills and competencies required from all active citizens in Europe. This entails long-term development of educational contents.

In European countries labour markets expect higher education qualifications from more and more young people. This is likely to be more difficult in countries offering only long one-tier qualifications. The higher education system is expected to offer independent, shorter degrees of the bachelor type geared specifically for labour market needs. At the same time there are needs for updating and upgrading qualifications and skills of the present labour force.

Disciplinary issues

Different disciplines have characters of their own and they have to be taken into consideration when developing degree structures. It should be clear that in some fields which involve professional accreditation bachelor-level degrees will not always serve as independent qualifications leading to full labour market relevant professional competence. However, in those fields too an intermediate qualification may be worth developing for the reasons mentioned above.

In all fields, reasonable transition mechanisms between bachelor and master programmes should be established, both within the same higher education sector and between different higher education sectors. These transition mechanisms should enhance also interdisciplinarity.

Reforming structures only is not enough. Transparency and comparability of transferable core competencies expected from graduates of bachelor and master programmes in broad subject areas are needed at the European level. Higher education institutions and their European networks involving professional bodies and other stakeholders should develop these common guidelines.

Fuente: http://www.crue.org/espaeuro/ESIB_seminar_bachelor.htm

Adicionalmente, relativo al nivel de bachillerato, el Seminario de San Petersburgo, Rusia, sobre "Bachelor’s Degree: What is it", realizado en noviembre del año 2004, ofrece (bajo la forma de presentaciones en PDF) dos estudios de casos: uno sobre Alemania y uno sobre Finlandia.

Una visión periodística de las dificultades con que se enfrentan algunos países europeos para la implementación de este objetivo de adopción de una estructura de dos niveles de estudios se encuentra en el siguiente artículo del Times Higher Education Supplement de 6 abril 2001.

En lo relativo al grado de maestría, o grado de segundo ciclo, se pueden consultar las conclusiones del Seminario de Helsinki (2003) (PDF) en que se concluyó lo siguiente:

Different dimensions of master degrees

(In this document the term master degree is used to describe all second-cycle higher education degrees at master level irrespective of their different national titles)

As the study made by European University Association shows most European countries have introduced or are about to introduce a higher education degree structure based on a sequence of bachelor, master and doctoral degrees.

According to this report, there is still some variety in the length of the study programmes leading to the master’s degree, but there seems to be a trend towards master degrees the total extent of which is 300 ECTS credits. In practice, this usually means five years of full-time studies.

The degree structures still vary considerably between the countries taking part in the Bologna Process. In addition, the two-tier structure is still perceived differently in our respective countries. In some higher education systems, bachelor's and master's degrees are seen as clearly self-supporting entities, whereas in others, the two cycles form rather a cumulative sequence of knowledge, skills and competencies in more or less the same disciplinary area. These differences can be accommodated within the European Higher Education Area if reconciled with its objective of creating more flexibility and individual choice in higher education qualifications.

Traditionally, most higher education institutions not included in the university sector in Europe have offered bachelor degrees, and only recently have they introduced master degrees in some countries. This development serves the purpose of diversification of higher education, which is called for by European labour market needs and the increasingly heterogeneous student population.

In order to increase the transparency of qualifications earned at different types of institutions or with different profiles, all higher education institutions should make use of the Diploma Supplement. Governments should make every effort to ensure that qualifications at the same level earned in different types of institutions enjoy, where appropriate, the same civil effect in professional life and in the pursuit of further studies.

The diversification of contents and profile of degree programmes calls for a common framework of reference of European higher education qualifications in order to increase transparency and thus to facilitate both national and international student mobility. Increasing student and teacher/staff mobility adds to cultural understanding and appreciation and promotes innovation in European higher education. Readable and comparable degree structures facilitate the professional recognition of qualifications and the mobility of labour force thus contributing to making the European labour market more dynamic for employers and graduates.

European higher education - a hallmark of excellence

Many European higher education institutions offer degree programmes designed for and marketed to international students. To serve this purpose, many institutions have chosen to develop education through widely-used foreign languages. This approach is understandable and welcome, as it increases the global attractiveness and competitiveness of higher education institutions in smaller linguistic areas. Development of the EHEA must not, however, lead to a mono-linguistic world of higher education. Within the EHEA governments and higher education institutions should make every effort to ensure teaching of the national languages to foreign students, even if the degree programme itself is in another language and proficiency in the language of the host country is not a prerequisite for admission. Multiculturalism, pluralism and linguistic skills are to remain the intrinsic values of European higher education.

Joint master degrees at the European level should become an important feature of European higher education both to promote intra-European cooperation and in order to attract talented students and researchers from other continents to study and work in Europe. Particular attention needs to be paid to introducing quality assurance mechanisms and to solving the specific recognition issues raised by joint degrees.

To serve a wider range of international students and contribute to capacity building in developing countries, the possibility of delivering European higher education through branch campuses operated by consortia of European universities should be explored and encouraged, especially at the master's level.

Two-tier degree structure: implications for mobility

General: Steps must be taken to consolidate and increase the present volume of mobility, also for longer periods of time. In order to be able to monitor in any precise way the volumes and flows in mobility, reliable statistical data not available at present need to be produced on a regular basis. The ratification of the Lisbon Recognition Convention in all EHEA countries would be desirable to increase mobility.

Intra-European mobility: Further growth in intra-European mobility (exchanges) presupposes a strong effort by governments and higher education institutions to consolidate and extend inter-institutional arrangements of a high quality, which will assure full recognition of periods studied and credits earned abroad. This also entails a coherent application of ECTS across the entire EHEA, as laid down in the recent “Key Features” document and the recommendations of the Zürich Conference on ECTS. National support schemes should be made portable.

With reference to intra-European degree (vertical) mobility, a strong plea is made to governments and institutions to ensure equal treatment of bachelor degrees between EHEA countries as a formal requirement for admission to master programmes.

Mobility between Europe and the world: In order to attract more students and young researchers from outside of Europe, supportive action is necessary. One such activity is the marketing of European higher education on other continents. Another is the creation of internationally attractive programmes taught in major world languages. Europe’s offer of this type of education must be considerably stepped up, beyond its present modest level. Framework conditions, such as conditions for entry and residence of third-country nationals in Europe, work permits and student services, must be improved to facilitate access to European higher education.

Framework of reference for master degrees in Europe

There are various European initiatives underway today that aim at defining learning outcomes and skills and competencies both at the bachelor and master level. This will allow capitalising on the richness of European higher education traditions and creating European profiles in the various disciplines. At the same time, the promotion of mobility in Europe requires increased transparency and comparability of European higher education qualifications. Some common criteria for the structural definition of master's degrees - in their various national names - are needed. This framework of reference should be flexible enough to allow national and institutional variations, but at the same time clear enough to serve as a definition.

The following recommendations adopted by the participants in the conference could be seen as useful common denominators for a master degree in the EHEA:

1. A master degree is a second-cycle higher education qualification. The entry to a master's programme usually requires a completed bachelor degree at a recognised higher education institution. Bachelor and master degrees should have different defined outcomes and should be awarded at different levels.

2. Students awarded a master degree must have achieved the level of knowledge and understanding, or high level in artistic competence when appropriate, which allows them to integrate knowledge, and handle complexity, formulate judgements and communicate their conclusions to an expert and to a non-expert audience. Students with a master degree will have the learning skills needed to pursue further studies or research in a largely self-directed, autonomous manner.

3. All bachelor degrees should open access to master studies and all master degrees should give access to doctoral studies. A transition from master level to doctoral studies without the formal award of a master’s degree should be considered possible if the student demonstrates that he/she has the necessary abilities. Differences in orientation or profile of programmes should not affect the civil effect of the master degrees.

4. Bachelor and master programmes should be described on the basis of content, quality and learning outcomes, not only according to the duration of programmes or other formal characteristics.

5. There are several ongoing international projects related to developing coherent quality assurance mechanisms in the EHEA. This work should be continued, and international aspects of national and regional quality assurance systems should be further developed.

6. Joint master programmes at the European level should be developed to promote intra-European cooperation and attract talented students and researchers from other continents to study and work in Europe. Particular attention must be paid to solving recognition problems related to joint degrees.

7. While master degree programmes normally carry 90 - 120 ECTS credits, the minimum requirements should amount to 60 ECTS credits at master level. As the length and the content of bachelor degrees vary, there is a need to have similar flexibility at the master level. Credits awarded should be of the appropriate profile.

8. In certain fields, there may continue to exist integrated one-tier programmes leading to master degrees. Yet, opportunities for access to intermediate qualifications and transfer to other programmes should be encouraged.

9. Programmes leading to a master degree may have different orientations and various profiles in order to accommodate a diversity of individual, academic and labour market needs. Master degrees can be taken at universities and in some countries, in other higher education institutions.

10. In order to increase transparency it is important that the specific orientation and profile of a given qualification is explained in the Diploma Supplement issued to the student.

Fuente: http://www.uam.es/europea/Results.pdf

Adicionalmente, sobre la introducción del MA como grado de segundo ciclo pueden consultarse:

Developing Joint Masters Programmes from Europe
Results of the EUA Joint Masters Project, March 2002 - January 2004
http://www.eua.be/eua/jsp/en/upload/Joint_Masters_report.1087219975578.pdf 

Survey on Master Degrees and Joint Degrees in Europe
By Christian Tauch and Andrejs Rauhvargers, 2002
Funded by the Socrates programme of the European Commission

http://www.eua.be/eua/jsp/en/upload/Survey_Master_Joint_degrees_en.1068806054837.pdf
 

Respecto de algunos de los debates a que da lugar la adopción de la nueva arquitectura de grados de la educación superior en Europa, puede consultarse el artículo de G. Wittenburg (PDF) “Accepting an European Bachelor Degree for Admission to the Master Degree Program” (2004)

También existe un interesante debate sobre la nueva arquitectura de grados europea, particularmente el grado de bachiller, y sus efectos de empleabilidad. A este respecto hay una amplia información en el sitio del Seminario de Bled, de octubre 2004, sobre “Employability and its links to the objectives of the Bologna Process”.

El Seminario de Estocolmo, de mayo 2004,  sobre “Joint Degrees – Further development”, aborda la cuestión de programas de maestría otorgados integrada y conjuntamente por dos o más instituciones de diferentes países, sus modalidades de funcionamiento, financiamiento y, sobre todo, dificultades de reconocimiento transnacional. Hay en el sitio recién indicado  una abundante información que incluye estudios de casos y recomendaciones sobre como avanzar. Sobre el mismo tópico puede consultarse el trabajo Estudio sobre Másters y Titulaciones Conjuntas en Europa (PDF, 1115 KB)

Por último, es también de gran interés el Seminario de Edimburgo, “Using Learning Outcomes”, de julio 2004, el cual aborda diversos asuntos relativos al cambio curricular, la evaluación de resultados y de los logros de aprendizaje en el contexto de la reforma de la educación superior europea. El respectivo sitio contiene la siguiente información:

Background Papers

Learning Outcomes by Stephen Adam
A consideration of the nature, role, application and implications for European education of employing ‘learning outcomes’ at the local, national and international levels.

E4 Thematic network: Enhancing Engineering Education in Europe by Günter Heitmann
This report is not an edition of various individual contributions but covers in a systematic way different topics with regard to curriculum development and innovative curricula based on work, dicussions and experiences of A1 members. It should invite and stimulate discussions in the dissemination year E4 started in October 2003. The hope is that interesting reference points for future development of curricula in EE in Europe are provided and can thus function as kind of a guideline.

Linking Levels Learning Outcomes and Assessment Criteria by Jenny Moon
This paper is designed to introduce the terminology and to demonstrate how the main descriptive structures should interrelate. The paper uses an integrated approach to the design of programmes and modules as a context for the description of level descriptors, learning outcomes and assessment criteria and their relationships.

Presentations

Stephen Adam's Presentation of Background Paper at 10.15am on 1st July 2004
Presentation

Andrew Cubie's Keynote Speech at 11am on 1st July 2004
Preface

Rober Wagenaar Case Study/Workshop Session 1 and 2 on 1st July 2004
Turning project - Robert Wagenaar, Joint Project Co-ordinator.
Presentation

Norman Sharp Case Study/Workshop Session 1 and 2 on 1st July 2004
Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework - Norman Sharp.
Presentation

Isabell le Mouillour Case Study/Workshop Session1 and 2 on 1st July 2004
Learning outcomes and credit systems in education, particularly VET - Isabelle le Mouillour.
Presentation

Rod Coleman Case Study/Workshop Session 1 and 2 on 1st July 2004
Learning outcomes-driven HE credit accumulation model - Rod Coleman, Southern England Consortium for Credit Accumulation and Transfer.
SEEC General Council Seminar
Presentation

Eva Gonczi Case Study/Workshop Session 1 and 2 on 1st July 2004
The Hungarian experience of learning outcomes - Eva Gonczi
Presentation

Alan Johnson, MP, Minister of State for Lifelong Learning, Further and Higher Education, UK Government on 1st July 2004
Speech

Mogens Berg Case Study/Workshop Session 3 and 4 on 2nd July 2004
HE Qualifications Framework - Morgens Berg, Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Denmark.
Presentation

Jenny Moon Case Study/Workshop Session 3 and 4 on 2nd July 2004
Some thoughts on learning outcomes - their roles and use in higher education in the UK - Jenny Moon, Southern England Consortium for Credit Accumulation and Transfer
Presentation

Christian Tauch Case Study/Workshop Session 3 and 4 on 2nd July 2004
Learning outcome - the German Experience - Christian Tauch
Presentation

Stephen Adam's Presentation at 14.15pm on 2nd July 2004
Using Learning Outcomes - day 2 Stephen Adam, ECTS/Diploma Supplement Counsellor
Presentation

Adicionalmente, en términos prácticos, se proporciona la oportunidad de usar el learning outcomes approach a los sistemas de educación superior mediante los siguientes materiales y recursos:

Report for the BFUG
Points for consideration
Evaluation exercise

Fuente: http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/EN/Bol_sem/Seminars/040701-02Edinburgh.HTM

3. Establecimiento de un sistema de créditos y el avance del ECTS

El European Credit Transfer System  es una pieza fundamental en el proceso de armonización de la educación superior europea. Como señala la página oficial de este sistema en la Red:

A credit system is a systematic way of describing an educational programme by attaching credits to its components. The definition of credits in higher education systems may be based on different parameters, such as student workload, learning outcomes and contact hours.

The European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System is a student-centred system based on the student workload required to achieve the objectives of a programme, objectives preferably specified in terms of the learning outcomes and competences to be acquired.

ECTS was introduced in 1989, within the framework of Erasmus, now part of the Socrates programme. ECTS is the only credit system which has been successfully tested and used across Europe. ECTS was set up initially for credit transfer. The system facilitated the recognition of periods of study abroad and thus enhanced the quality and volume of student mobility in Europe. Recently ECTS is developing into an accumulation system to be implemented at institutional, regional, national and European level. This is one of the key objectives of the Bologna Declaration of June 1999.

ECTS makes study programmes easy to read and compare for all students, local and foreign. ECTS facilitates mobility and academic recognition. ECTS helps universities to organise and revise their study programmes. ECTS can be used across a variety of programmes and modes of delivery. ECTS makes European higher education more attractive for students from other continents.

·                     ECTS is based on the principle that 60 credits measure the workload of a full-time student during one academic year. The student workload of a full-time study programme in Europe amounts in most cases to around 1500-1800 hours per year and in those cases one credit stands for around 25 to 30 working hours.

·                     Credits in ECTS can only be obtained after successful completion of the work required and appropriate assessment of the learning outcomes achieved. Learning outcomes are sets of competences, expressing what the student will know, understand or be able to do after completion of a process of learning, long or short.

·                     Student workload in ECTS consists of the time required to complete all planned learning activities such as attending lectures, seminars, independent and private study, preparation of projects, examinations, and so forth.

·                     Credits are allocated to all educational components of a study programme (such as modules, courses, placements, dissertation work, etc.) and reflect the quantity of work each component requires to achieve its specific objectives or learning outcomes in relation to the total quantity of work necessary to complete a full year of study successfully.

·                     The performance of the student is documented by a local/national grade. It is good practice to add an ECTS grade, in particular in case of credit transfer. The ECTS grading scale ranks the students on a statistical basis. Therefore, statistical data on student performance is a prerequisite for applying the ECTS grading system. Grades are assigned among students with a pass grade as follows:


A best 10%
B next 25%
C next 30%
D next 25%
E next 10%

A distinction is made between the grades FX and F that are used for unsuccessful students. FX means: “fail- some more work required to pass” and F means: “fail – considerable further work required”. The inclusion of failure rates in the Transcript of Records is optional.

How to obtain the ECTS Label?

An ECTS label will be awarded to institutions which apply ECTS correctly in all first and second cycle degree programmes. The label will raise the profile of the institution as a transparent and reliable partner in European and international cooperation.

The criteria for the label are: an Information Package/Course Catalogue (online or hard copy in one or more booklets) in two languages (or only in English for programmes taught in English), use of ECTS credits, samples of Learning Agreements, Transcripts of Records and proofs of academic recognition.

An application form has been published.  The application deadline is Nov 1st, annually. The label will be valid for three academic years. The list of institutions in possession of the label will be published on the Europa web site.

Fuente: http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/programmes/socrates/ects_en.html

Información adicional sobre el ECTS puede encontrarse en:

The Information Package/Course Catalogue of the institution to be published in two languages (or only in English for programmes taught in English) on the Web and/or in hard copy in one or more booklets. The Information Package/Course Catalogue must contain the items of the checklist including information for host students from abroad.

The Learning Agreement contains the list of courses to be taken with the ECTS credits which will be awarded for each course. This list must be agreed by the student and the responsible academic body of the institution concerned. In the case of credit transfer, the Learning Agreement has to be agreed by the student and the two institutions concerned before the student’s departure and updated immediately when changes occur.

The Transcript of Records documents the performance of a student by showing the list of courses taken, the ECTS credits gained, local or national credits, if any, local grades and possibly ECTS grades awarded. In the case of credit transfer, the Transcript of Records has to be issued by the home institution for outgoing students before departure and by the host institution for incoming students at the end of their period of study.

Fuente: http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/programmes/socrates/ects_en.html

Sobre movilidad estudiantil, el sitio más importante de consulta es ERIC-NARIC.NET, The European Gateway to Recognition. Entre otros, ofrece detallada información sobre los sistemas y procedimientos nacionales de reconocimiento, como se muestra en la siguiente tabla de vínculos:

Albania, AL

Andorra, AD

Armenia, AM

Australia, AU

Austria, AT

Azerbaijan, AZ

Belarus, BY

Belgium, BE

Bosnia and Herzegovina, BA

Bulgaria, BG

Canada, CA

Croatia, HR

Cyprus, CY

Czech Republic, CZ

Denmark, DK

Estonia, EE

Finland, FI

France, FR

FYROMacedonia, MK

Georgia, GE

Germany, DE

Greece, GR

Holy See, VA

Hungary, HU

Iceland, IS

Ireland, IE

Israel, IL

Italy, IT

Latvia, LV

Liechtenstein, LI

Lithuania, LT

Luxembourg, LU

Malta, MT

Moldova, MD

Monaco, MC

Netherlands, NL

New Zealand, NZ

Norway, NO

Poland, PL

Portugal, PT

Romania, RO

Russian Federation, RU

San Marino, SM

Serbia and Montenegro, YU

Slovak Republic, SK

Slovenia, SI

Spain, ES

Sweden, SE

Switzerland, CH

Turkey, TR

Ukraine, UA

United Kingdom, GB

USA, US

    

Fuente: http://www.enic-naric.net/members.asp

Información adicional es proporcionada por el Taller Seminario de Riga, Letonia, relativo a “Improving the Recognition System of Degrees and Periods of Studies” (diciembre 2004),  donde se encuentran los siguientes materiales:

Background report: Improving the Recognition System, Andrejs Rauhvargers, President of the Lisbon Convention Committee (Latvia)

Contributions by plenary speakers:

International recognition and quality assurance - two priorities of Bologna, Jindra Divis, NUFFIC, The Hague

Recognition for the labour market, Dirk Haaksman, NUFFIC, The Hague

Recognizing learning outcomes, Norman Sharp, Quality Assurance Agency, Glasgow (Scotland)

The impact of emerging qualifications frameworks on recognition, Stephen Adam, University of Westminster, London

Recognition of credit points – achievements and problems, Wolker Gehmlich, Fachhochschule Osnabrück, Germany

Programs, Providers and Accreditors on the Move: Implications for Recognition of Qualifications, Jane Knight, University of Toronto, Canada

Observations on the United States as Stakeholder in the Bologna Process, Timothy S. Thompson, University of Pittsburgh & National Council on the Evaluation of Foreign Educational Credentials, USA

Fuente: http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/EN/Bol_sem/Seminars/041203-04_Riga.HTM

El debate sobre la duración de los estudios en la nueva estructura propuesta por el Proceso de Bolonia ha alcanzado también al Consejo de Rectores de las Universidades de España (PDF).

Materiales adicionales claves de referencia sobre movilidad estudiantil y reconocimiento de grados son:

International legal framework for recognition - (Lisbon Convention and its supplementary documents)

Recognition of foreign qualifications (guidebook)

La información legal de soporte se encuentra en los textos listados a continuación:

Legal Framework & Background

Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications concerning Higher Education in the European Region (The Lisbon Convention), 1997 (ETS No. 165)

Explanatory Report to the Lisbon Convention

Related Council of Europe/UNESCO Documents

Recommendation on the Recognition of Joint Degrees (PDF), 2004

Explanatory Memorandum (PDF)

Recommendation on Criteria and Procedures for the Assessment of Foreign Qualifications and Periods of Study, 2001

Explanatory Memorandum

Outline of Procedure

Code of Good Practice in the Provision of Transnational Education, 2001

Explanatory Memorandum

Recommendation on International Access Qualifications, 1999

European Convention on the General Equivalence of Periods of University Study, 1990 (ETS No. 138)

UNESCO Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Diplomas and Degrees concerning Higher Education in the States belonging to the Europe Region, 1979 (UN Treaty Series No. 20966)

Earlier conventions and other instruments

European Agreement on Continued Payment of Scholarships to Students Studying Abroad, 1969 (ETS No. 069)

Protocol to the European Convention on the Equivalence of Diplomas leading to Admission to Universities, 1964 (ETS No. 049)

European Convention on the Academic Recognition of University Qualifications, 1959 (ETS No. 032)

European Convention on the Equivalence of Periods of University Study, 1956 (ETS No. 021)

European Convention on the Equivalence of Diplomas leading to Admission to Universities, 1953 (ETS No. 015)

The Recognition of Refugee's Qualifications

Guidelines for the recognition of refugee's qualifications, 1999

Background Paper -- A tool fo the assessment of qualifications held by refugees, 1999

Policies and Practices: Recognition and Non-European Countries

Mutual Recognition of Qualifications: the Russian Federation and the Other European Countries, 2000

Guidelines for the Mutual Recognition of Qualification Between Europe and the U.S.A., 1994

Ver además el sitio Treaty Office del Consejo de Europa para un complete registro de las convenciones y sus textos ye informes explicativos (en varios idiomas).

4. Aseguramiento de la calidad mediante el desarrollo de criterios y metodologías comparables

Un elemento clave en la construcción del espacio común europeo de educación superior es el establecimiento de sistemas y metodologías comparables de aseguramiento de la calidad de programas e instituciones, como base para facilitar la movilidad estudiantil, académica y profesional y el reconocimiento mutuo de certificados educacionales.

Información reciente sobre el proceso de desarrollo de este sistema se encuentra en el Informe Trends III citado más arriba y, adicionalmente, en los trabajos presentados al Seminario de Santander sobre “Methological Common Instruments for Assessment and Accreditation in the European Framework”, de julio de 2004. Se encuentran allí los siguientes materiales de interés:

General Report, Leonardo Marcos González, Subdirector General de Formación y Movilidad en Posgrado y Posdoctorado, Dirección General de Universidades, Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia de España

Presentaciones y discursos:

Menéndez Pelayo, Rector, International University (UIMP)
Francisco Marcellán, Director of ANECA
Séamus Puirséil, Member of ENQA Steering Group
Ian McKenna, Former Chair of the Bologna Follow up Group (BFUG)
Lesley Wilson, Secretary General of the European University Association (EUA)
Ailsa Crum, UK Delegate to the BFUG
Nicolaas Heerens, Representative of the National Unions of Students in Europe (ESIB)
Presentation - Speech

Karl Dittrich, Vice-president of the Netherlands Accreditation Organisation (NAO)
Helmut Konrad, President of the Austrian Accreditation Council
Andrzej Jamiołkowski, President of the Polish Committee for Accreditation
Hans-Uwe Erichsen, President of the German Accreditation Council
Oddvar Haugland, President of the Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education
Fidel Corcuera, Advisor of ANECA European Convergence Programme

Fuente: http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/EN/Bol_sem/Seminars/040728-30-Spain.HTM

Una revisión actualizada de los progresos realizados en este frente del proceso de Bolonia se hallan en el Informe (PDF) de agosto 2004 sobre “Implementation of Council Recommendation 98/561/EC of 24 September 1998 on European cooperation in quality assurance in higher education”.

Se señala en este Informe:

Almost all Member States and other European countries have set up quality assurance systems or are about to do so. The experience varies in duration and intensity but all regard quality assurance as an essential feature of their higher education systems. The systems in function operate along the lines set out in the 1998 Council Recommendation. The Recommendation calls upon the Member States to support and, where necessary, establish transparent quality assurance systems. The answer of most Member States has been the creation of one or more quality assurance agencies, aiming at quality improvement through external evaluation. Higher education institutions have been encouraged to set up their own internal quality assurance mechanisms, not least to provide a basis for external evaluation.

The characteristics of the national higher education system influence the ownership, scope and focus of agencies and their activities. Hence the existence of different models. A few countries have opted for a ‘star model’ with one central accreditation agency, overseeing a series of more specific evaluation or accreditation agencies.

Others have one single agency in charge of quality assurance or accreditation. The Council Recommendation states that “autonomy and/or independence of the relevant structures, of the body responsible for quality assurance (as regards procedures and methods) is likely to contribute to the effectiveness of quality assurance procedures and the acceptance of results”. On the other hand, it is generally acknowledged that agencies should operate in close contact with academia and take due account of the needs of society, public and private sponsors, students, parents and the labour market.

Next to national or regional agencies there are a great number of professional accrediting organisations (e.g. for engineers, medical doctors, accountants). They existed long before the Council Recommendation and their modus operandi is not influenced by it. There are, however, similarities and synergies worth exploring. This is also true for international accrediting agencies or bodies such as the European EQUIS (business studies) and the American agencies AACSB (Business studies) and ABET (engineering accreditation in the US and assistance in the development of accreditation systems in other countries).

Eight evaluation or accreditation types can be distinguished: Subject evaluation, programme evaluation, institutional evaluation, programme accreditation, institutional accreditation, institutional audit (of internal quality assurance mechanisms), subject benchmarking and programme benchmarking. The most common remains programme evaluation, but programme accreditation comes close and institutional audit is the third most popular type. More recent is the interest in programme or subject benchmarking, looking for the best practice in a given field. There is a clear trend towards more variety in evaluation types and most agencies use more than one evaluation type on a regular basis.

The Council recommended that systems of quality assurance should be based on the features, listed in the Annex to the Recommendation. By and large the agencies work according to these features, although their application may differ according to the national or institutional context. A short analysis of their implementation is as follows:

Criteria

The Recommendation links quality assurance criteria closely to the aims assigned to each institution in relation to the needs of society and of the labour market. The ENQA survey3 demonstrates that there is a clear shift away from evaluation against the stated goals of the institution, towards the use of more objective external criteria and standards in evaluation and accreditation exercises. These may be minimum threshold standards, average standards or more demanding higher standards, aiming at recognising excellence.

Self-evaluation by institutions

Self-evaluation is a requirement of most of the evaluation and accreditation schemes. The self-evaluation group consists in most cases of management and teaching staff. Students rarely participate. Participation of administrative staff and students varies.

Site-visits by expert group

The site-visit is a standard element of the evaluation process. The visit consists of meetings and interviews, often a tour of the facilities, a meeting with senior management and the examination of documentary evidence.

Composition of the expert group

All agencies use external experts and very often international experts are included in the expert panel, notably in the cases of neighbouring countries sharing the same language. Experts from the world of employment are used in less than half of cases, professional associations, students and graduates even less. The inclusion of foreigners in the governing bodies of agencies is less common but increasing.

Reporting and follow-up

Reports are published in most but not in all cases of evaluation and accreditation. It is common practice to consult the evaluated institutions before the reports are published. In three quarter of cases, institutions are held responsible for follow-up on the recommendations; in half of cases they share this responsibility with agencies and government.

Most countries are involved, in varying degrees in bilateral, multilateral, European and global cooperation on quality assurance and accreditation. These transnational initiatives have similar objectives: identifying comparable criteria and methodologies and fostering the well functioning of quality agencies in order to achieve more transparency and, ultimately, the mutual recognition of quality assurance systems and assessments.

The Governments of Belgium (Flanders) and the Netherlands have decided to integrate their quality assurance activities into one joint accreditation system. Quality assurance agencies and higher education authorities from twelve countries have decided to engage in the ‘Joint Quality Initiative’, an informal network cooperating on issues of quality assurance and accreditation of bachelor and master programmes in Europe. 13 Agencies from eight countries have decided to found the European Consortium for Accreditation ECA, focussing on the accreditation aspect of the quality assurance process and aiming at mutual recognition of their respective quality assurance systems and judgements by 2007. The Network of Central and Eastern European Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education (CEE Network) has 18 member agencies6 and Quality assurance agencies from the five Nordic countries decided in 2003 to formalize their cooperation in a Nordic Quality Assurance Network in Higher Education.All above groupings concern member agencies of the broad European Network for Quality assurance in Higher Education (ENQA).

ENQA was created as a direct result of the 1998 Council Recommendation and can therefore be considered both as its most concrete outcome at European level and as a starting point and key actor for future developments. The ENQA General Assembly of June 2004 has decided to extend ENQA membership to agencies from all 40 Bologna Signatory States and to introduce reforms needed for ENQA to fulfill its future task of providing services to its members and working towards mutual recognition of quality assurance systems in Europe. ENQA has engaged itself into close cooperation with the ENIC and NARIC networks of credential evaluators in order to explore how better information on quality can speed up the recognition of diplomas and periods of study, in particular as regards transnational education. ENQA is planning to facilitate, through its members, transnational evaluations, notably the transnational evaluation of joint and double degrees.

Fuente: http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/EN/Part_org/EU/040930_EC_quality.pdf

Por último, se ofrece a continuación una lista de publicaciones recientes de la European Network for Quality Assurance (ENQA) sobre diversos aspectos del aseguramiento de calidad en los países de Europa: 

 

Accreditation Models In Higher Education (2004)

ENQA has published its third workshop report, on the contents and results of a seminar on accreditation models. The event has hosted by the Comitato per la Valutazione del Sistema Universitario, an ENQA member agency. The final workshop report can be accessed here:
 

Teep Methodological Reflections (2004)
ENQA coordinated this pilot project which was supported by the European Commission to investigate the operational implications of a European trans-national quality evaluation in three disciplines (Physics, History, Veterinary Science) in order to test a method for transnational external evaluation. The methodological report can be accessed here:
 

Transnational European Evaluation Project (TEEP) - subject-specific reports (2003)

History
Physics
Veterinary Science

ENQA is coordinating this pilot project which is supported by the European Commission to investigate the operational implications of a European trans-national quality evaluation in three disciplines (Physics, History, and Veterinary Science) in order to test a method for transnational external evaluation. The three subject-specific reports can be accessed here


Quality Procedures in European Higher Education (2003)

ENQA has published a new survey on quality assurance procedures in Europe. You can access the report through this link  (PDF)

Benchmarking in higher education (2003)

ENQA has published a workshop report on the use of benchmarking in the improvement of higher education You can access the report through this link  (PDF)

A Method for Mutual Recognition (2002)

ENQA's latest report is a detailed description and analysis about a pilot project for a mutual recognition procedures between two Nordic quality assurance agencies. You can access the report through this link  (PDF)

Quality Assurance Implications of New Forms of Higher Education (2001)

ENQA has commissioned a project to understand and identify the principal forms and characteristics of new forms of higher education and implications of these forms for current approaches to quality assurance. This report is the result of the first stage of the project and has resulted in a report which can be accessed through this link (PDF)

Quality Assurance in the Nordic Higher Education - accreditation-like practices (2001)

A group of member agencies from the Nordic countries joined in 2000 in a common project to analyse the concept of accreditation and identify accreditation procedures and similar practices. The project has resulted in a report which can be accessed through this link (PDF)

Institutional Evaluations in Europe (2001)

ENQA has published its first report in the new ENQA Workshop Reports series. Institutional Evaluations in Europe can be entered by clicking on the name of the report (PDF).

Trends in Learning Structures in Higher Education (II) (2001)

This follow-up and update to the first Trends in Learning Structures in Higher Education report by Guy Haug and Christian Tauch can be viewed through the Finnish National Board of Education website.

Fuente: http://www.enqa.net/pubs.lasso

5. El fomento de la educación permanente a lo largo de la vida para todos y la formación técnico-vocacional

Como se señala en la parte inicial de este documento, tanto el objetivo de la educación continua a lo largo de la vida para todos como el Proceso de Copenhague, referido al entrenamiento técnico-vocacional, convergen con el Proceso de Bolonia dentro de la misma estrategia de transformación de los sistemas formativos europeos de cara al 2010 y dentro de los objetivos fijados por la estrategia de Lisboa.

Efectivamente, el aprendizaje permanente es un elemento clave dentro de la estrategia de Lisboa. Se busca que ella asegure tres objetivos principales objetivos principales:

·         to improve the quality and effectiveness of EU education and training systems;

·         to ensure that they are accessible to all;

·         to open up education and training to the wider world.

El documento Making a European Area of Lifelong Learning a Reality contiene las orientaciones que guían la política de formación de los países europeos en esta material; en tanto que la Resolución del Consejo sobre Educación Permanente (PDF) señala como se deberán implementar dichas orientaciones.

Respecto de la noción e importancia del aprendizaje permanente, el enfoque de la Unión Europea se refleja con nitidez en el siguiente párrafo:

Lifelong learning encompasses learning for personal, civic and social purposes as well as for employment-related purposes. It takes place in a variety of environments in and outside the formal education and training systems. Lifelong learning implies raising investment in people and knowledge; promoting the acquisition of basic skills, including digital literacy; and broadening opportunities for innovative, more flexible forms of learning. The aim is to provide people of all ages with equal and open access to high-quality learning opportunities, and to a variety of learning experiences, throughout Europe. Education systems have a key role to play in making this vision a reality. Indeed, the Communication stresses the need for Member States to transform formal education and training systems in order to break down barriers between different forms of learning.

Fuente: http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/policies/lll/lll_en.html

Respecto a la educación técnico vocacional y el reconocimiento mutuo de diplomas en este ámbito, y la certificación de competencias dentro del espacio europeo, la información más reciente del sitio de entrenamiento del Consejo de Europa señala:

Article 127 of the Treaty of Rome (Art. 150 TEC) stated that "the Community shall implement a vocational training policy which shall support and supplement the action of the Member States while fully respecting the responsibility of the Member States for the content and organisation of vocational training."

The Lisbon European Council in March 2000 set the European Union the strategic goal of becoming the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based society in the world. The development of vocational training is a crucial and integral part of this strategy. The Barcelona European Council in March 2002 reaffirmed this important role and gave a mandate to make European education and training a world reference by 2010, and to develop closer co-operation in vocational training (in parallel to the Bologna process in higher education).

Since 1 January 2000, training skills acquired abroad can be registered in a personal document, the Europass-Training, developed by the EU in a related initiative. In March 2002, following the request of the Lisbon European Council, the Commission recommended a common format for curricula vitae. The new ‘European CV’ is different from most other CVs in that it emphasises the importance of non-formal and informal learning.

Following the ‘Bruges’ initiative of the Directors General for vocational training (October 2001), education Ministers of 31 European countries (Member States, candidate countries and EEA countries) have adopted the Copenhagen Declaration on enhanced European cooperation in vocational education and training (30 November 2002). The declaration gives a mandate to develop concrete actions in the fields of transparency, recognition and quality in VET.

The support of governments for European cooperation in vocational training was secured earlier, and perhaps more readily, than in the case of education. The Council of Ministers established CEDEFOP, the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training, in 1975, and a number of initiatives in the 1980s were precursors to what is now the Leonardo da Vinci programme, adopted in 1994. The aim of the Leonardo programme is to contribute to the implementation of an EU vocational training policy. The Council of the European Union approved a Resolution (12-11-02) on the promotion of enhanced European co-operation in vocational education and training, giving a formal mandate to pursue the objectives developed under this process

Leonardo da Vinci is designed to support and supplement action taken by the Member States, using transnational cooperation to improve quality, promote innovation and strengthen the European dimension of training systems and practices. The programme has been progressively opened to participation by 30 countries.

The European Training Foundation (Turin) began activities in 1995 as an EU agency working in over forty non-EU countries, including the candidate countries. Its mission is to assist and support its partner countries in reforming and modernising their vocational education systems. The Foundation works closely with CEDEFOP and also provides technical assistance to the Tempus programme.

While CEDEFOP contributes to the development of vocational training in the EU through its academic and technical activities, focusing on trends, studies, analyses and information exchanges, Leonardo da Vinci is a funding programme under which anyone can receive a grant, although applications for project funding cannot be submitted in an individual capacity. It is open to a very wide range of public and private sector organisations and companies active in training, or concerned by training issues, and grouped in an international partnership.

Training is an even more diffuse field of activity in Europe than education, hard to map in terms of accurate statistics, and it is one of the missions of the Leonardo da Vinci programme "to build a quantitative information system" that will provide "timely and coherent support" for policy-making.

The programme supports transnational mobility, placement and exchange projects, study visits, pilot projects, transnational networks, linguistic and cultural skills, as well as disseminating good practice and compiling reference material.

Fuente: http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/policies/training/training_en.html

En particular, la Declaración de Copenhague (PDF) da lugar a una creciente preocupación por la convergencia de los sistemas de formación técnico-vocacional,  o Proceso de Copenhague, el cual se encarga de  promover la armonización de los sistemas formativos nacionales en el ámbito de las cualificaciones y competencias para el trabajo.

Bajo el supuesto de que los sistemas de educación y formación profesionales desempeñan un papel fundamental como dispensadores de competencias y cualificaciones, comprendiendo una amplia diversidad de legislación, estructuras de educación y formación y actores clave, entre los que figuran tanto los gobiernos como los interlocutores sociales, la Unión Europea ha expresado:

1. Su compromiso de reforzar la cooperación en el ámbito de la educación y formación profesionales, a fin de eliminar los obstáculos a la movilidad profesional y geográfica y promover el acceso a la educación permanente. Ello supone aplicar medidas para aumentar la transparencia y el reconocimiento de competencias y cualificaciones dentro de los sistemas de educación y formación profesionales, y el compromiso de promover una cooperación más estrecha en lo relativo a la calidad de los sistemas de educación y formación profesionales europeos como base sólida para la confianza mutua.

2. Que debe potenciarse el desarrollo de la cooperación en el ámbito de la educación y la formación profesionales mediante medidas y actuaciones desarrolladas fundamentalmente en el contexto del Informe sobre los objetivos futuros concretos de los sistemas de educación y formación, teniendo en cuenta la Resolución sobre la educación permanente, pero también en el contexto de la estrategia europea para el empleo. Para lograr dichos fines son medios importantes los instrumentos de educación y de formación de la Comunidad, en particular el programa Leonardo da Vinci, el Fondo Social Europeo y las iniciativas sobre aprendizaje electrónico y lenguas extranjeras.

3. Que es preciso reforzar la dimensión europea en la educación y formación profesionales, con el objetivo de potenciar la cooperación a fin de facilitar y fomentar la movilidad y el desarrollo de la cooperación interinstitucional, de las asociaciones y de otras iniciativas transnacionales, todo ello con el fin de realzar la imagen del sector educativo y formativo europeo en un contexto internacional, de modo que Europa sea considerada como una referencia mundial para los estudiantes.

4. La necesidad de aumentar la transparencia de la educación y formación profesionales mediante la aplicación y racionalización de los instrumentos de información y redes, además de la integración de los instrumentos existentes, tales como el curriculum vitae europeo, los suplementos del título o de la certificación de estudios, el Marco común europeo de referencia en materia de lenguas y EUROPASS en un único marco.

5. Que se requiere reforzar las políticas, sistemas y prácticas que apoyan la información, la orientación y el asesoramiento en los Estados miembros en todos los niveles de la educación, la formación y el empleo, en particular sobre cuestiones relativas al acceso a la enseñanza, la educación y formación profesionales y a la transferibilidad y reconocimiento de competencias y cualificaciones, con vistas a apoyar la movilidad profesional y geográfica del ciudadano en Europa.

6. Que se debe investigar cómo podrían fomentarse, entre los distintos países y a diferentes niveles, la transparencia, la comparabilidad, la transferibilidad y el reconocimiento de competencias y/o cualificaciones mediante el desarrollo de niveles de referencia, principios comunes para la certificación y medidas comunes que incluyan un sistema de transferencia de créditos en la educación y formación profesionales.

7. La necesidad de aumentar el apoyo al desarrollo de competencias y cualificaciones a escala sectorial, reforzando la cooperación y la coordinación, haciendo participar especialmente a los interlocutores sociales. Ilustran este enfoque varias iniciativas comunitarias, bilaterales o multilaterales, entre las que se incluyen las que ya se han establecido en varios sectores para el reconocimiento mutuo de las cualificaciones.

8. La conveniencia de desarrollar un conjunto de principios comunes respecto a la validación de la educación no formal e informal con el fin de garantizar una mayor compatibilidad entre enfoques en distintos países y a diferentes niveles.

9. Que es importante promover la cooperación en lo relativo a la garantía de la calidad, centrándose en particular en el intercambio de modelos y de métodos, así como en criterios y principios comunes de calidad de la educación y la formación profesionales. Asimismo, prestar atención a las necesidades de aprendizaje de profesores y formadores en todas las formas de la educación y formación profesionales.

Fuente: http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/copenhagen/resolution_es.pdf

En lo relativo a los mecanismos para la construcción del espacio común europeo de formación técnico-vocacional, se ha señala lo siguiente:

There is an urgent need to develop a "common currency" of qualifications and competences. Furthermore, an emphasis on quality is essential in order to make Vocational Education & Training (VET) the "royal route", and also to improve the standing of vocational qualifications and competences at international level.

The Member States, EEA countries the social partners and the Commission have begun cooperation at a practical level, focused on a number of concrete outputs:

·         A single framework for transparency of competences and qualifications. The intention is to bring together into a single user friendly and more visible format the various existing transparency instruments, for example the European CV, the certificate supplements and diploma supplements, the Europass-Training and the national reference points, possibly using the EUROPASS brand. The Commission will come forward with a concrete proposal for the single framework by Autumn 2003.

·         System of credit transfer for VET. Inspired by the successful European Credit Transfer System in higher education, the intention is to develop a similar system for the vocational sector.

·         Common criteria and principles for quality in VET. Taking forward the work of the European Forum on Quality, a core of common criteria and principles for quality assurance will be developed, which could serve as a basis for European level initiatives such as quality guidelines and checklists for VET.

·         Common principles for the validation of non-formal and informal learning. The aim is to develop a set of common principles to ensure greater compatibility between approaches in different countries and at different levels.

·         Lifelong guidance. The aim is to strengthen the European dimension of information guidance and counselling services, enabling citizens to have improved access to lifelong learning.

Fuente: http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/copenhagen/index_en.html

6. La promoción de un área europea de investigación científica y tecnológica (European Research Area - ERA)

Los principales hitos en la definición de una política para la construcción de la ERA son los siguientes.

Primero, esta política forma parte, al igual que los Procesos de Bolonia y de Copenhague, de la estrategia inicialmente diseñada por el Lisbon European Council, la cual en este frente se basó en la comunicación titulada "Towards a European Research Area".

Segundo, durante el Barcelona European Council se fijó como meta que la inversión en investigación y desarrollo (I y D) debía incrementarse para alcanzar la meta de un 3% del PIB alrededor del año 2010.

Tercero, las 2002 Broad Economic Policy Guidelines reafirmaron la importancia estratégica de dicha meta y recomendaron mejorar los incentivos para que los sectores privados aumenten su contribución al esfuerzo de I y D a nivel europeo.

Cuarto, dentro de esta perspectiva se ha definido la European Research Area (ERA) como un objetivo prioritario para aumentar la competitividad de la economía europea y se ha establecido el 6th EC Framework Programme, el cual busca consolidar y desarrollar el espacio europeo de investigación.

Una pieza fundamental dentro de la estrategia para la construcción de la ERA es la política de inversión de I y D. A este respecto es importante el comunicado de la Comisión Europea More research for Europe - Towards 3% of GDP (2002), así como las reacciones producidas por aquel. Posteriormente, la Comisión dio a conocer un segundo comunicado --Investing in research: an action plan for Europe (2003)—en el cual se identifican acciones concretas que podrían ayudar a obtener la meta del 3% alrededor del año 2010. Este último comunicado se acompañó por un Commission Staff Working Paper, el cual entrega información adicional de apoyo referida a los siguientes temas:

o        The importance of R&D investment for growth

o        Developments in national policies towards the Barcelona objective

o        The positive response of the business sector to the first Commission communication on the Barcelona objective

o        The contributions of the 6th Framework Programme to the Barcelona objective

o        The approach proposed for the application of the open method of co-ordination to the Barcelona objective

o        European technology platforms

o        Supply chain of human resources for R&D

Por ultimo, se han establecido varios grupos de trabajo para estudiar como mejorar la efectividad del apoyo público a las iniciativas privadas de inversión en I y D, cuyos principales informes son los siguientes:

o        Mix of Public Support Mechanisms (PDF)

o        Guarantee mechanisms  (PDF)

o        Risk capital (PDF)

o        Direct measures  (PDF)

o        Fiscal measures (PDF)

Un resumen ejecutivo de las propuestas tendientes a la conformación de la ERA se contiene en los siguientes párrafos:

·         The present action plan sets out initiatives required to give Europe a stronger public research base and to make it much more attractive to private investment in research and innovation. Carrrying out these actions will allow the European Union to bridge the growing gap in the levels of research investment between Europe and its main trading partners, which is putting at risk our long term innovation, growth and employment potential. The objective is to reach the objective set by the March 2002 Barcelona European Council, to increase the average research investment level from 1.9% of GDP today to 3% of GDP by 2010, of which 2/3 should be funded by the private sector.

·         To reach the Barcelona objective, research investment in Europe should grow at an average rate of 8% every year, shared between a 6% growth rate for public expenditure and a 9% yearly growth rate for private investment. This is ambitious yet realistic given the strong support given to the objective.

·         The March 2003 European Council called for the Commission to present this action plan, which has been prepared on the basis of a wide consultation of European institutions, Member States, acceding and candidate countries, as well as stakeholders from industry; public research and finance. The consultation showed a very broad support for the 3% objective. It revealed that most countries are already taking measures to boost investment in research, and that many have set national targets in line with the European 3% objective.

·         The action plan aims at building on this momentum, ensuring that the necessary initiatives at European and national levels are sustained, mutually consistent and commensurate with the challenge of bringing radical improvements to the European system of research and technological innovation. Europe is facing a situation where the weakest link in the system risks discouraging investment - to give but a few examples: the shortcomings and rigidities of research careers, leading excellent human resources to move out of research or out of Europe; the dispersion and lack of visibility of Europe's often excellent research; the difficulties encountered by technology-intensive SMEs to find financing for their research and innovation projects; or the lack of awareness of researchers and research managers regarding the protection and management of intellectual property.

·         The action plan complements a series of mutually reinforcing European initiatives aimed at boosting the Union's competitiveness, notably in the fields of enterprise and innovation policy, and of structural reforms in the product, services, capital and labour markets. Together they form the Commission's policy response to the March 2000 Lisbon European Council objective to "make Europe the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-base economy by 2010".

·         The action plan comprises four main sets of actions.

·         A first set of actions aims at supporting the steps taken by European countries and stakeholders, ensuring that they are mutually consistent and that they form an effective mix of policy measures. This includes a process of co-ordination with and between Member States and acceding countries. It also entails creating a number of "European technology platforms", which will bring together the main stakeholders - research organisations, industry, regulators, user groups, etc. - around key technologies, in order to devise and implement a common strategy for the development, the deployment and the use of these technologies in Europe.

·         The second set of actions aims at improving considerably public support to research and technological innovation. In order to invest in research in Europe, enterprises need to find there abundant and excellent teams of researchers, a strong public research well articulated with industry, and effective public financial support, including through fiscal measures. The action plan focuses on actions to improve the career of researchers, to bring public research and industry closer together, and to develop and exploit fully the potential of European and national public financial instruments. For example, the action plan asks public authorities to eliminate by 2005 the current rules and practices, attached to many public funding schemes, which prevent trans-European cooperation and technology transfer and thus reduce considerably the research and innovation opportunities available to the beneficiaries.

·         A third set of actions addresses the necessary increase in the levels of public funding for research. Given the current economic downturn, it is all the more important to ensure that budgetary policies favour investments that will lead to higher sustainable growth in the future, among which research is a strong priority. Actions focus on encouraging and monitoring the redirection of public budgets, and on making full use of the possibilities for public support to industry offered by State aid rules and public procurement rules. For example, the action plan proposes to clarify and improve awareness of the types of public support that public authorities can use with no distortion to competition

·         Lastly, a fourth set of actions aims at improving the environment of research and technological innovation in Europe: intellectual property protection, regulation of product markets and related standards, competition rules, financial markets, the fiscal environment, and the treatment of research in companies' management and reporting practices. For example, the action plan sets the objective that every student in science, engineering and business should receive at least a basic training on intellectual property and technology transfer.

·         The action plan marks the start of a process. Progress will be monitored and the Commission and Council will give further orientations in the future, if appropriate, to keep the Union on track. However, there is little time to succeed and the gap is still growing rapidly between Europe and its major trading partners. Implementation must start immediately at all levels, and it must be driven with a clear vision that what is at stake is the success or failure of Europe's ambition to become the most vibrant place for innovation-driven growth and employment creation.

Fuente: http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/era/3pct/3pct-executive.html


Avances del Proceso de Bolonia en su aplicación a diferentes carreras profesionales

Los siguientes recursos de información están destinados a mostrar como se ha ido implementando el Proceso de Bolonia en diferentes carreras y países, ofreciendo un panorama de las iniciativas, avances y problemas que plantea el complejo proceso de transformación curricular, definición de competencias y estructuración de los grados y diplomas.

Agronomía y Veterinaria

Towards a European Standard for Agricultural Engineering Curricula (PDF, 135 KB)

Transnational Evaluation Of Four European Veterinary Programmes (PDF, 644 KB)

Bellas Artes y profesiones asociadas al patrimonio cultural

Mapa europeo de enseñanza (PDF, 84 KB)

The Bologna Process in Higher Arts Education: an Overview (PDF, 43 KB)

The Effects Of The Bologna Declaration On Professional Music Training In Europe (PDF, 192 KB)

Music Education in a European Dimension (PDF, 119 KB)

Libro Blanco para Diseño de la Titulación: Bellas Artes (PDF, 263 KB )

Bibliotecología

Proyecto De Diseño De Plan De Estudios Y Título De Grado En Información Y

Documentación (PDF, 272 KB)

Título de grado en Información y Documentación (PDF, 696 KB)

Ciencias

The Future of the MMath  (PDF, 39 KB)

Cross Border Quality Assessment in Physics. Evaluation Report (PDF, 563 KB)

Informe sobre la Convergencia de los Estudios Relacionados con la Física en el

Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior (PDF, 2217 KB )

Título de grado en matemáticas (PDF, 402 KB)

Título de grado en Química (PDF, 581 KB)

Título de grado en Física (PDF, 744 KB)

Derecho

University Training: The Implications Of The Bologna Declaration For The UK (PDF, 161 KB)

The Curriculum Proposal For Studies In Law (PDF, 126 KB)

 
Diseño

Libro Blanco para el Diseño de la Titulación: Diseño (PDF, 269 KB)

Educación

La Preparación Del Profesorado Universitario Español Para La Convergencia Europea

En Educación Superior (PDF, 982 KB)

Teachers’ Education And The Bologna Process: A Survey On Trends In Learning Structures At Institutions Of Teachers’ Education (PDF, 423 KB)

Brief report from meeting with Expert Group A “Improving education of teachers and

trainers” (PDF, 50 KB)

The European Commission Project Tuning And Its Potential To Materialise Targets Of The Bologna Process In The Fields Of Educational Sciences And Teacher Education (PDF, 159 KB)

Diseño de las Titulaciones de Grado en de Pedagogía y Educación Social (PDF, 1147 KB)

Geología

Título de grado en Geología (PDF, 275 KB)

Título de grado de ingeniero en Geomática y Topografía (PDF, 1543 KB)

Historia y Geografía

Título de grado en Historia (PDF, 487 KB)

Título de grado en Geografía y Ordenación del territorio (PDF, 1212 KB)

Ingenierías

Restructuring Of Mechanical Engineering Education (PDF, 171 KB)

 

Los Programas De Ingeniería Ante El Espacio Europeo De Educación Superior (bobada)

The Bologna Declaration and Engineering Education in Europe (PDF, 33 KB)

A New Structure for Engineering Education in Ireland (PDF, 253 KB)

The Bologna Declaration and Engineering Education – a Discussion Paper (PDF, 162 KB)

CLAIU’s opinion on the Sorbonne/Bologna Declaration (PDF, 22 KB)

Convergence of Engineering Higher Education - Bologna and Beyond (PDF, 434 KB)

Informe Sobre La Adaptación De Los Estudios De Las Ingenierías En Informática A La

Declaración De Bolonia (PDF, 388 KB)

The impact of the Bologna Declaration on European Engineering Education (PDF, 79 KB)

Guidance document for the Master of Engineering Degree, MEng (PDF, 38 KB)

Innovations in Engineering Education Challenges, Concepts and Good Practice (PDF, 14 KB)

Communication of CESAER and SEFI on the Bologna Declaration (PDF, 465 KB)

New Demands For Research Training In Engineering Education (PDF, 22 KB)

White paper: Introduction of Bachelor and Master degrees un Geo-informatics (PDF, 58 KB)

Análisis De La Situación De Los Estudios Superiores De Temática Ambiental En Universidades Europeas (PDF, 1188 KB )

The Impact Of The Bologna Declaration on Engineering Education (PDF, 797 KB)

Implementing the Bologna Curriculum Model for University Level Engineering

Education in Switzerland (PDF 109 KB)

Engineering Programme Design And Specification - Interpreting And Using The Engineering Benchmark Information  (PDF, 96 KB)

TUNING Educational Structures in Europe. Report of the Engineering Synergy Group

(PDF, 122 KB)

Ingeniería Comercial y administración

Libro Blanco Sobre Los Estudios De Grado En Economía Y En Empresa (PDF, 2940 KB)

Medicina, Enfermería y profesiones de la salud

The Bologna Declaration and Medical Education (PDF, 155 KB)

European Region Of The World Confederation For Physical Therapy: Policy Statement (PDF, 54 KB)

The Bologna Declaration and Medical Education (PDF, 178 KB)

How Does The Undergraduate Medical Education & Training System Impact On Your Organisation? (DOC, 88 KB)

Harmonization Of PhD Programs In Medicine And Health Sciences (PDF, 253 KB)

Analysis of European Medical Schools’ Teaching Programs (PDF, 80 KB)

Supporting the Development of Nursing and Midwifery within a New Enlarged

European Union: An Explorative Review (PDF, 237 KB)

Hacia un Modelo Integral de Gestión del Área Enfermera (PDF, 777 KB)

Título de Grado en Odontología (PDF, 463 KB)

Título de grado en Fisioterapia (PDF, 547 KB)

Psicología

A European Framework for Psychologists' Training (DOC, 130 KB)

Activity Report of the Executive Council of EFPA submitted to the General Assembly of EFPA (PDF, 111KB)

Turismo

Título de grado en Turismo (PDF, 1483 KB)

Competencias

Tuning Educational Structures in Europe (PDF, 2736 KB)

Cursos de honor

Honours Programmes, Sources of Innovation in Higher Education: a perspective from the Netherlands (PDF, 212 KB)

Títulos obtenidos en el extranjero

Recognition of Foreign Qualifications. Guide for Recognition Specialists (PDF, 562 KB)


Avances del Proceso de Bolonia en su aplicación a algunas universidades o facultades

Bologna Process at the University of Helsinki: Review of the Reform of Degree Structures, 22 November 2004 (PDF, 1044 KB)

University of Leiden: The BA-MA structure and mobility of students in European Political Science (PDF, 127 KB)

Pembroke College, University of Cambridge: Locating ourselves in the ‘European Higher Education Area’: investigating the Bologna Process in practice (PDF, 461 KB)

Ideals Of The Idea League (Imperial College, London, Uk, Delft University Of Technology, The Netherlands, ETH Zürich, Switzerland, and RWTH Aachen, Germany) (PDF, 888 KB)

New IDEAs for internationalisation within the knowledge society ((Imperial College, London, Uk, Delft University Of Technology, The Netherlands, ETH Zürich, Switzerland, and RWTH Aachen, Germany) (PDF, 104 KB)

Education and Training for Mobility in Technical University of Czestochowa (PDF, 181 KB)

Imperial College Risk Register And Action Plan (2003/04). Possible Mitigating Actions Early Warning Indicators (PDF, 213 KB)

Reforming The Study Programs And Curricula At The University Of Tirana From The Perspective Of The Provisions Of The Bologna Declaration. A Case Study (January 2003) (PDF, 136 KB)

Alternativen bei der Einführung von .Bologna. Die Umstellung auf das BA/MA-System  in der niederländischen Politikwissenschaft (PDF, 712 KB)

Bologna Reform at the University of Zurich

University of Banja Luka (PDF, 137 KB)

University of Montenegro (PDF, 88 KB)

University of Nis (PDF, 89 KB)

University of Novi Sad (PDF, 72 KB)

University of Prihstina (PDF, 98 KB)

Sts. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje (PDF, 139 KB)

University of Split (PDF, 156 KB)

University of Tirana (PDF, 133 KB)

University of Zagreb (PDF, 80 KB)

The Bologna Declaration And Planned Follow-Up At The VSB - Technical University of Ostrava (PDF, 289 KB)

La Declaración de Bolonia y su repercusión en la estructura de las titulaciones en España (PDF, 121 KB)

New in the Netherlands: An Update of the Dutch Educational System for Credential Evaluators, Admissions Officers and Professionals in the Field of International Education (PDF, 58 KB)

Realisierung der Ziele der „Bologna-Erklärung“ in Deutschland - Sachstandsdarstellung und Ausblick auf Berlin 2003 (PDF, 202 KB)

UK Position Statement on the Bologna Process (PDF, 34 KB)

Realizing the goals of the Bologna Declaration in Germany (GermanyPDF, 202 KB)

The 2000 Reform Of University Teaching In Italy (DOC, 75 KB)