JDD--Prebologna contextHE in Europe fragmented:• Degrees differed in name, requirements – National degrees could not be compared• Access, length of programmes, dissemination – varied from country to country• One-tier systems without distinction between undergraduate and postgraduate level – could not be compared to systems allowing students to leave university at different levels
JDD-prebologna• However, students had become mobile (cf. Erasmus)• Increased willingness to apply for jobs in foreign countries of study• Reduced employment chances due to national degrees unknown across borders
First JDD: toward integrationGoal: increase employability of internationally mobile students• Mutual evaluation of programmes became more based on learning outcomes – rather than on individual modules• Individual modules became mutually recognized – even though contents of individual modules not completely identical
DD versus JD• DD: emphasis on mutual recognition (usually bilateral) of modules; two diplomas -->student mobility• JD: emphasis on joint construction, management, quality assurance and teaching (usually multilateral) of programmes; one diploma -->student and teacher mobility Obstacle: national legislation
Bologna ProcessJoint Degree Programmes:• create a Common European Educational Area• Preferred instruments: – joint programmes, joint quality assurance, joint organisational structure – joint degrees (mutual recognition of academic degrees and qualifications, University Seal/Signature, even though a student was never on the spot)
Getting there:• Bologna (1999) and Prague (2001) – develop modules, courses and curricula at all levels – with „European‟ content, orientation or organisation”.• EUA joint Masters project (2002) – Support of 11 “joint” Masters programmes• Coimbra (2003) – First distinctive definition Joint – versus Double/Multiple degree• Berlin Ministerial Communiqué (2003) – develop integrated curricula – remove national legal obstacles to joint degrees
Cluj 2003 EUA conference on Joint Degrees Recommends further discussion and action in:– amending national legislation to enable HE to award joint degrees;– anchoring joint programmes firmly within institutional structures;– developing appropriate QA and recognition mechanisms, with ‘European label’for joint programmes
ERASMUS MUNDUS IIn accordance with these recommendations:• 2004, launching of Erasmus Mundus by EU: mobility programme aiming to strengthen links between the EU Member States and third countries.• AIM: create 250 new inter-university Masters courses and provide EU-funded scholarships for third country nationals studying in the EU (and for EU nationals studying in third countries).
EM I, 2004-2008 EM goal• enhance attractiveness and competitiveness of European HE• Support Bologna drive to promote joint degrees.• EM I became crown jewel of EU HE policy• Extended as EM II (2009-2013) with a budget multipled by 5 (€230 M-€950M)
Changes in EM II• joint PhD-programmes – (in addition to joint Masters programmes)• grants for EU-students – (as well as Non-EU-students)• non-EU universities can be full partners – (integration of prev. Action 3: cooperation with non-EU universities into Action 1: prev. Action 1, 2):• industrial partners required – (strong emphasis on employability)• EU-support maximum of 2 phases – (strong emphasis on sustainability)
PhD in EM II versus Marie CurieIn EM II, as in Marie Curie ITN,• association with industry/potential employers• professionals = employment contract – (not students=scholarship)BUT• EMII is at institutional level,• MC at research network level.Unsolved question:• ECTS??? (for mobility, training: YES)
Joint degree problem• 2009: still not officially recognised in some member states but ammendments to legislation are being prepared.• Double/multiple diplomas considered transition state towards EU-desired joint diplomas
EMCL in EMII: 2009-2013• Changed EM system• Changed EMCL application – Changed partnership – Changed programme – Changed semester system – Changed boards – Improved quality assurance
Improved QA: Internal1. Student feedback – Local feedback (teacher/course evaluation) at the participating institutions using their established systems customised for the integrated nature of the EMCL-programme, – Common feedback (evaluation of institutions) collected centrally by the consortium using standardised questionnaires, – Alumni feedback for employability evaluation and further suggestions for the programme. This is done via the website and on the SOA- conference.2. Scholar feedback – standardised catalogue of criteria. Feedback before the end of their stay.3. Self-evaluation of participating institutions – For the internal evaluation of teaching, learning and other programme- related activities, procedures already in place in the institutions are followed.
QA: external (already in place)• Systematic external quality assurance is provided through permanent peer feedback: – colleagues from the University of Newcastle and the University of Oslo are always present at consortium board meetings, – monitoring all activities from student selection to programme development and bringing problems to the attention of the responsible parties.• The programme is also the object of continuous quality control – according to the participating institutions established quality assurance policies and – through evaluation of the national/regional bodies.
Other joint consortium instruments• Module Descriptions• Joint Curriculum• Joint Rules and Regulations• Partnership Agreement• Student Agreement• Scholarship Agreement• Supervision Agreement• Associate member agreement
ECTS: Transcoding System (Problem with proportional system in excellent cohorts)
ECTS-weighted module grade and total grade• Module grades for Module 1-6 are published in the "Joint Grade Record".• Total grades are given in the diploma• MG = ECTS-weighted mean of grades in (variable CP) module courses using the following weights: – A: 1 x CP – B: 1.5 x CP – C: 2.5 x CP – D: 3 x CP – E: 4 x CP• TG: similar procedure for calculation of total grades from (variable CP) MG
Example calculation MG: M5 (#CP depending on mobility plan)Student A: Student B:M5= 24 CP M5 = 45 CP 7 CP: A; 10 CP; B; 7 CP: A 10 CP: A; 5 CP: B; 10 CP: C; 10 CP: B; 10 CP: A 7 CP x 1 = 7 10 CP x 1 = 10 10 CP x 1.5 = 15 5 CP x 1.5 = 7.5 7 CP x 1 = 7 10 CP x 2.5 = 25 10 CP x 1.5 = 15 10 CP x 1 = 10 (7 + 15 + 7) / 24 = 1.2 (10 + 7.5 + 25 + 15 + 10) /45 = 1.5MG: A MG: B
Final student documents• Joint (multiple) degree• Joint diploma supplement• Joint grade record