The document discusses the evolution and implementation of joint degree programs in higher education across Europe, emphasizing the Bologna Process and its goals for mutual recognition and integration of degree systems. It outlines various initiatives like Erasmus Mundus aimed at enhancing student mobility and employability while facing challenges such as national legislation and varying quality assurance processes. The text also details the framework for joint programs, including curriculum development, quality assurance mechanisms, and the structure of degree recognition.

1. www.emcl-mundus.com

2. www.emcl-mundus.com
Bologna degrees

3. Double/multiple (DD) Joint (JD)

4. JDD--Prebologna context
HE 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

5. 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

6. First JDD:
toward integration
Goal: 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

7. 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

8. Bologna Process
Joint 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)

9. 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

10. 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

11. ERASMUS MUNDUS I
In 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).

12. 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)

13. 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)

14. PhD in EM II
versus Marie Curie
In 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)

15. 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

16. EMCL in EMII: 2009-2013
• Changed EM system
• Changed EMCL application
– Changed partnership
– Changed programme
– Changed semester system
– Changed boards
– Improved quality assurance

17. Joint student selection

18. Explicit rating criteria
• Academic quality (60%)
• Motivation (10%)
• Recommendations (10%)
• English (10%)
• Work experience (10%)

19. Common organisation structure

20. Improved QA: Internal
1. 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.

21. 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.

22. Other joint consortium
instruments
• Module Descriptions
• Joint Curriculum
• Joint Rules and Regulations
• Partnership Agreement
• Student Agreement
• Scholarship Agreement
• Supervision Agreement
• Associate member agreement

23. Agreement scheme

24. Mobility plan

25. Modular structure
• M1: Propaedeutics (work-up classes, intensive rehabilitation
classes)
• M2: Language and culture classes (Finnish, Dutch, German)
• M3: Methods (including statistics and experimental linguistics)
• M4: Psycho-/Neurolinguistics (including neuroimaging)
• M5: Clinical linguistics (aphasia, dyslexia, developmental
language disorders, speech disorders)
• M6: Master thesis (including scientific writing, exposé,
internship)
• M7: Research extras (colloquia, reading circles, excursions,
SOA-conference)

26. Module ECTS variable-
Mobility choice JPJ
Specialisation M3: Experimental Linguistics

27. Module 3: Description

28. Module ECTS variable
Mobility choice GPG
Specialisation M5: Clinical Linguistics

29. Module 5: Description

30. Module ECTS variable
Mobility choice JPG
Specialisation: M4: Psycho- and
Neurolinguistics

31. Module 4: Description

32. Module ECTS-Mobility choice
GPJ
Specialisation M5: Clinical Linguistics

33. Variable ECTS/Module
depending on mobility,
i.e. specialisation
• M1: 10 ECTS
• M2: 10 ECTS
• M3: 5-20 ECTS
• M4: 10-35 ECTS
• M5: 10-45 ECTS
• M6: 30 ECTS
• M7: --

34. ECTS: Transcoding System
(Problem with proportional system
in excellent cohorts)

35. 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

36. 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 = 1.5
MG: A MG: B

37. Final student documents
• Joint (multiple) degree
• Joint diploma supplement
• Joint grade record

38. Thank you
for your attention

40. Joint Curriculum

41. Module 1: Description

42. Joint Curriculum: Term 1

43. Joint Curriculum Term 2

44. Joint Curriculum Term 3

45. Joint Curriculum Term 4