Teacher Education, the European Dimension

Teacher Education Policy in Europe (TEPE) Network Workshop University of Tallinn, 9-10 February 2007 Teacher Education, the European Dimension and the Bologna Process Pavel Zgaga University of Ljubljana

1.0 Introduction Two starting points:  teacher education should be considered as an integral part of higher education and research higher education and research systems in European countries are on the way towards a common European Higher Education and Research Area The Trends 4 Report (2005): “some institutions chose to use the opportunity which the Bologna process presented in a very proactive manner, trying to optimise the institution’s position with the help of the new framework for structural changes, while others refrained from reviewing their teaching and learning processes until it could no longer be avoided.”

2.0 Responsibilities: national vs. transnational “Bologna” is a voluntary action of European countries and institutions: neither the “European dimension” nor the Bologna Process could be an argument in favour of standardisation and/or implementation of “one European model” of education in general or of teacher education in particular. Public responsibility for education is a characteristic feature of European countries and it will certainly remain at least for a reasonable period of time. The Maastricht Treaty: “The Community shall contribute to the development of quality education by encouraging co-operation between Member States” while “fully respecting the responsibility of the Member States for the content of teaching and the organization of education systems and their cultural and linguistic diversity” and “excluding any harmonization of the laws and regulations of the Member States”.

3.0 The emerging EHEA: where are we now? Biannual reports will be ready until May 2007… So far, some notes from Trends 4 Report (2005) also useful.  “Creating a system of easily readable and comparable degrees is a central – and for many even the essential – objective of the Bologna process. Since 1999, however, the experience of introducing two or three cycles to Europe’s national higher education systems has demonstrated that there is […] ample room for different and at times conflicting interpretations regarding the duration and orientation of programmes. Especially the employability of 3 year Bachelor graduates continues to be an issue in many countries. […] There are various modes and speeds of introducing the new systems”.

3.1 … something meaningful at Bachelor level… Trends 4:  “Numerous institutions confirmed that the speed of (and motivation for) reforms is perceived very differently across some disciplines and faculties. In some universities the Humanities disciplines seem to have the least problems offering first- and second-cycle degrees; in others they find it almost impossible to do something meaningful at Bachelor level. The same is true for the regulated professions where professional bodies play a significant role in helping or hindering the introduction of the new degree structures.”

3.2 … disciplines excluded from Bologna… Trends 4:  “Overall, however, the situation is remarkably different from two or three years ago, when not only medicine, but also teacher training, engineering, architecture, law, theology, fine arts, psychology and some other disciplines were excluded from the two-cycle system in many countries. Today, if at all, this restriction seems to apply only to medicine (and related fields) in most countries. […] Teacher training and certain other disciplines still pose problems, in some national contexts more than others, and here national systems are experimenting with a variety of solutions.”

3.3 … validity of three-year Bachelors … Trends 4:  “Discussions on both the duration and the purpose of programmes at Bachelor level continue. The misconception that the Bologna process ‘prescribes’ in any way the 3+2 year structure is still widespread. 3+2 is indeed the dominant model across the European Higher Education Area, even in countries where HEIs have the choice between three and four years for the Bachelor level […]. In many universities professors and, to a lesser degree, deans and sometimes the institutional leadership, still express profound doubts regarding the possibility to offer a degree after only three years that is both academically valid and relevant to the labour market: ‘Employability’ to these critics often seems to be synonymous to a lowering of academic standards. Reservations about the validity of three-year Bachelors are particularly strong in engineering, the physical sciences and fine arts.”

4.0 Where are we now in teacher education? General note: “Teacher education” – what do we mean? Modern history of teacher education – and training. A hypothesis: the Bologna Process bring a serious challenges to the fast developments that have occurred in the field of teacher education since the 1980s. A) European dimension. Despite clear international trends and some international “standardisation”, changes in education systems are still predominantly nationally oriented. A teacher is still perceived as a teacher within the national context but there is also an increasing necessity to position her/him within the European context. With regard to other study fields and professions (e.g. medicine, engineering, science, business and management etc.), teacher education (could) lag behind.

4.1 Employability, disciplinarity, professionalization B) Employability: when we translate general strategic guidelines into concrete field, concrete troubles appear… Unclear definition of teacher education disciplinary field ; between “subject(s)” and “pedagogy”: “a conflict of faculties”… Hirsch: “scholars and scientists of one discipline can readily cross- fertilize colleagues in other. Problems increasingly transcend the competence of single disciplines or departments.” A need for flexibility and interdisciplinary character of teacher education. Teacher profession has also to be established and clearly recognised. Differences among teachers in existing national systems!

4.2 “Structural dimension” in teacher education C) Two-cycle system: first (180-240 ECTS) and second cycle (60- 120 ECTS). Headache for many who organise two-cycle system in practice. CEPS surveys (2003, 2006):  an increase of curricular reform activities at institutions;  institutions are completely divided into two blocks regarding the formula 3+2 vs. 4+1. What problems are hiden behind these empiric facts? • Interdisciplinary and pluridisciplinary character of TEd • Initial vs. continuous TEd • Parallel vs. consecutive TEd

4.3 Mobility in teacher education D) Mobility: how mobile students in teacher education are? An average share of students in teacher education in EU 27 of today is a bit over 10%. Data show that the share of mobile students in teacher education is proportionally lower than in most of other study areas and/or disciplines. Position of teacher education in two main EU mobility programmes – Erasmus and Tuning – is surprisingly weak and decreasing! An increase of mobile students in teacher education is urgent – not only to keep closer to other study fields but also to promote European mobility in education in general (not only higher education).

4.4 Quality and internationalisation E) Quality. There are cases of good practice in some national environments and ENTEP also engaged in quality assurance issues at the last seminar (September 2006). However, on the European and international level teacher education lag behind other fields of study as e.g. medicine, engineering, economy and business etc. It is a trend today that specialised trans-national accreditation and/or quality agencies are established to act in the “prominent” individual fields of studies – but this is not a case in teacher education. The energy behind this trend is principally linked to issues which are closely related to mobility: internationalisation, competitiveness and attractiveness. Is teacher education so far still too “national” and not yet “internationalised”?

5.0 Teacher Education Policy for Europe Teacher education institutions have achieved an enhanced “academic critical mass”. Through their teaching and research, they could and should address questions of e.g. teaching, learning and assessment – but not only! They also play a constructive role in national education reforms. They could/should play a similar role also in designing teacher education policies as well as in researching and teaching in this area. They should take their part of responsibility for teacher education and for the future of teacher education. A draft proposal: Teacher Education Policy for Europe (TEPE)

 In a period when we move closer and closer to the European Higher Education Area, declared by the Bologna Process, it is most urgent that these issues are addressed again, from today’s point of view, encountering questions and dilemmas of today, learning from reach European contexts. There are several possible contents as well as several formal possibilities how to support new projects. This is a list of possible options (not exclusive and not closed): (1) An (informal) network of institutions (and/or researchers) who are active in this field and who already run similar projects (e.g. supported on institutional and/or national funds). Such a network offers an added value in mutual exchange of information and in mutual learning. Under certain conditions (critical mass) it could give a possibility for transformation into a formal network and for application for EU funds.

(2) An EU-application for a common TEPE project: a consortium of teacher education institutions with a good reputation in research and graduate studies (research project and publication in the TEPE area as well as a right to perform Master’s and Doctoral studies are a prerequisite for collaboration) could be formed with a double task: a) to start a comprehensive project on TEPE (key issues, methodology, division of work and organisation are defined together; results are published on Internet as well as in publications; a set of policy conclusions and recommendations is made at the end); b) to include their Master and Doctoral students in the research work in the frame of a “TEPE Doctoral School” based on student and staff mobility (joint research is organised and summer schools; students receive credits for their research work and participation in summer schools; these credits are automatically recognised by their home institutions).

(3) On a more ambitious level (possibly at the next step of development), a joint Master and/or Doctoral study programme (Joint Degree) could also be possible after: a) solving conceptual, formal and procedural problems related to joint degree programmes at the universities involved; b) defining the essence of research work within such programmes and particular expertise from particular co- operating institutions; c) considering if an Erasmus-Mundus application (and broadening the scope of the project also to non-European spaces) is feasible.

(4) On an even more ambitious level, a thematic (TEPE) network could be possible as well (however, on a different horizon than in previous point). A broader circle of teacher education institution – with an initiative group in the centre – would gradually organise a European network aiming at: a) mapping, analysing and presenting trends in European Teacher Education; b) engaging in joint designing of – e.g. learning outcomes based – new curricula, c) including their Master and Doctoral students in the research work and guaranteeing them recognition of credits earned; d) developing policy recommendations and concrete strategies for institutions of teacher education; e) broadening the circle of institutions involved and influencing the policy decision processes at institutional, national and European levels, f) etc.

Your comments, please?

Teacher Education, the European Dimension

by Mart Laanpere on Feb 10, 2007

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

2 Embeds 10

Statistics

Teacher Education, the European Dimension — Presentation Transcript

http://www.slideshare.net	8
http://translate.googleusercontent.com	2