Presentation on theme: "Doctoral studies in Bologna Process. Structure Training of young researchers in the documents of Bologna Process Organisation, conditions and regulations."— Presentation transcript:
Doctoral studies in Bologna Process
Structure Training of young researchers in the documents of Bologna Process Organisation, conditions and regulations of doctoral training (the main focus on mobility, recognition and the use of credits) Excellence as the distinctive trait of doctoral training (the main focus on assessment and supervision) Some questions for further discussion
Graz Declaration (before Berlin Communiqué) Link between European Higher Education (EHEA) and Research Areas (ERA). Graduates at all levels exposed to a research environment and to research- based training. Doctoral programmes = main link between EHEA and ERA Enhancement of European collaboration and increase of mobility at the doctoral and post-doctoral levels (e.g. Joint Doctoral programmes) Europe of knowledge Research as an integral part of higher education
Berlin Communiqué (2003) Research – integral part of EHE I cycle 3-4 years ECTS II cycle years ECTS Long cycle 5-6 years ECTS Postgraduate cycle e.g. low medicine I + II = 300 ECTS III cycle 3-4 years ECTS ?? Effect of Berlin Communiqué - Focus on inclusion of the doctoral level as the third cycle - Importance of research and research training - Increase in mobility on the doctoral and the postdoctoral levels Ministers asked Higher Education Institutions to increase the role and relevance of research to technological, social and cultural evolution and to the needs of society
EHEA i ERA – two pillars in the development of Europe of Knowledge EHEA I Cycle Bachelor II cycle Master III Cycle Doctor Research III Cycle Doctor European Research Area ERA (Research and Innovation Area) ERA EHEA Education of young researchers - doctoral programmes - post-doctoral training
Salzburg Principles (February 2005) (before Bergen Communiqué) The core component of doctoral training is the advancement of knowledge through original research (doctoral training through research not for research) Embedding in institutional strategies and policies The importance of diversity Doctoral candidates as early stage researchers The crucial role of supervision and assessment Achieving critical mass Duration (3 to 4 years full time as a rule) The promotion of innovative structure Increasing mobility Ensuring appropriate funding
Bergen Communiqué (2005) Importance of research and research training in enhancing the competitiveness and attractiveness on the EHEA The increase of the number of doctoral candidates The synergy between the HE sector and others research sectors Doctoral level qualification included into the QF The needs for structural doctoral programmes and transparent supervision and assessment Promotion of the interdisciplinary training and the development of transferable skills Participants in third cycle programmes considered both as students and as early stage researchers RECOMMENDATIONS
London Communiqué (2007) - confirmation of close connection between EHEA and ERA Positive assessment of a wide variety of doctoral programmes linked to QF for EHEA and improving the status, career and funding for early stage researchers Invitation of HEIs to reinforce their efforts to embed doctoral programmes in institutional strategies and policies Invitation of EUA to continue to support the sharing of experience and good practices among HEIs on the range of innovative doctoral programmes
Leuven Communiqué (2009) The Bologna Process The European Higher Education Area in the new decade Education, research and innovation 15. Higher education should be based at all levels on state of the art research and development thus fostering innovation and creativity in society. We recognise the potential of higher education programmes, including those based on applied science, to foster innovation. Consequently, the number of people with research competences should increase. Doctoral programmes should provide high quality disciplinary research and increasingly be complemented by inter-disciplinary and inter-sectoral programmes. Moreover, public authorities and institutions of higher education will make the career development of early stage researchers more attractive.
Organisation, conditions and regulations on doctoral training DIVERSITY OF ORGANISATION Individual education Structured programmes Graduate and doctoral research schools Trend towards Different models Master students & doctoral candidates with crosscutting administrative support & transferable skills development Doctoral candidates only, often organised around a discipline or research theme may involve several institutions
Organisation, conditions and regulations on doctoral training source: Doctoral Programmes in Europes Universities: Achievements and Challenges, EUA 2007 Forms of organisation in various countries
Organisation, conditions and regulations on doctoral training Diversity of doctorates (research doctorates, taught doctorates, professional doctorates, industrial doctorates, European doctorates etc.) Diversity of doctoral programmes reflects diversity of EHEIs that have autonomy to develop their mission and priorities Consensus: original research has to remain the main component of all doctorates No consensus on new doctorates in Europe & further debate is needed source: Lesley Wilson, Bologna Seminar Doctoral Education in the European Higher Education Area from a University Perspective, EUA, Helsinki, 30/09/2008
Status of doctoral candidate = Early Stage Researcher Organisation, conditions and regulations on doctoral training source: Doctoral Programmes in Europes Universities: Achievements and Challenges, EUA 2007 Whatever the status, it is crucial that doctoral candidate is given all commensurate rights (healthcare, pension, social security)
Organisation, conditions and regulations on doctoral training source: M. Lola, Marie Curie Fellowship Association, EUA Conf., Salzburg 2005 incuiry MCFA, Eurodoc & Pi-Net (2003); 2790 answers Social security
The international dimension of doctorate programmes and doctoral schools has to be taken into account in evaluation of institutions Promotion of international cooperation & mobility at doctoral level – becomes an integral part of institutional strategies joint doctoral programmes, co-tutelles, European doctorates, etc more transsectoral mobility (collaboration with industry) international cooperation in the field of doctoral studies (international staff, international summer schools & conferences, etc.) Challenge: ensuring that the added value of different forms of mobility is recognised for the career development of ESRs Organisation, conditions and regulations on doctoral training Internationalisation and mobility – recommendations (1) sources: Bologna Seminars - EUA: Nice – April 2006, Helsinki - September 2008
Public authorities and HE institutions should stimulate and facilitate international mobility of doctoral candidates, post docs and senior researchers / academics Funding possibilities for international doctoral programmes (and information about) should be improved More organisational institutional support is needed (also for families) Removal of obstacles: recognition of degrees; legal problems (visa, work permit, social security, transferable pension claim, teaching and administrative obligations at home institutions) Reinforce the position of researchers mobility centres providing information about working / funding possibilities on European and national levels Organisation, conditions and regulations on doctoral training Internationalisation and mobility – recommendations (2) sources: Bologna Seminars - EUA: Nice – April 2006, Helsinki - September 2008
The duration of doctoral studies – convergence in similar study field would be welcome; diversities between fields should be acknowledged and tolerated International cooperation by restricting the recognition of degrees by national agencies (diversity in degree awarded: in wide topics or in subtopics highly specialised) Standards should be maintained and benchmarked by having national and international examiners who can judge the substantive original contribution To develop an international perspective doctoral candidate should spend periods at another research university, often abroad Organisation, conditions and regulations on doctoral training Internationalisation and mobility – some common rules
Tools of Bologna Process (QF, LO, ECTS) Consensus – Qualification Framework (QF), Learning Outcomes (LO) No consensus on ECTS – further debate is needed Examples of opinions: LERU, May 2007 – Allocations of credits to doctoral training has no useful purpose but rather adds unnecessary bureaucracy Tuning, Autumn 2008 (J. Gonzalez & R. Wagenaar) – discusses usefulness of ECTS as a planning instrument for doctoral studies Organisation, conditions and regulations on doctoral training
Excellence as the distinctive trait of doctoral training Excellence must be encouraged and supported and to be a part of the regular research assessment of departments and faculties rather than be monitored by an excessively regulated bureaucratic system Careful selection of the best candidates and their evaluation are needed both at entrance and throughout the training period Doctoral training must remain clearly distinct from the first and second cycles of HE While the main component is independent research, there should be a structured programme of activity (e.g. seminars, courses) LERU (League of European Research Universities) – recommendations (May 2007)
Excellence as the distinctive trait of doctoral training SUPERVISION AND ASSESSMENT Starting point - Salzburg Recommendation (2005) V. The crucial role of supervision and assessment: In respect of individual doctoral candidates, arrangements for supervision and assessment should be based on transparent contractual framework of shared responsibilities between doctoral candidates, supervisors and the institution (and where appropriate including other partners). It is a good practice in many HEIs but.... discussion is needed on formal arrangements Doctoral candidate SupervisorInstitution Formal arrangements determine rights and duties of each party Individual contracts Regulations at the level of state; institution ? What is better ? conflict
Excellence as the distinctive trait of doctoral training Models of supervision Individual Multiply (team) 2 or 3 supervisors with one principal Supervisor + committee Collective supervision (double joint or panel) What is the best model? Does it depend on - discipline? - type of degree (research/professional)? - mode of studying (full time/part time)? To what extent external experts should be involved? SUPERVISION
Supervision and assesment Excellence as the distinctive trait of doctoral training role and responsibilities of a supervisor models of supervision formal arrangements selection of a supervisor t raining of supervisors qualification requirements for a supervisor conflict resolution SUPERVISION MONITORING & ASSESSMENT source: A. Krasniewski, EUA Conf. on Doctoral Programmes in Europe, Nice, Dec. 2006
Excellence as the distinctive trait of doctoral training SUPERVISOR Qualification requirements Role and responsibilities source: A. Krasniewski, EUA Conf. on Doctoral Programmes in Europe, Nice, Dec E.g. Expertise in the field of research Current involvement in (international) research projects E.g. Actively guide through the research Provide critical review of research results Provide for equipment and resources Who should define requirements? Special requirements for supervisors of professional doctorates? How to verify whether or not the requirements are satisfied? Formal procedure to register as a (principal) supervisor? Should a minimum number of contact hours be guaranteed? How much supervision is needed? Is supervisor responsible for financial support? Are there specific duties of supervisors of professional doctorate?
Training of supervisors Assessment of supervisors Excellence as the distinctive trait of doctoral training Should the training be mandatory? Only for new supervisors or also for experienced? What about team supervisors? What should be the scope and form of training? How to overcome the resistance of professors? How and by whom should supervisors be assessed? Should doctoral candidates be involved? What should be a consequence of a negative assessment?
Excellence as the distinctive trait of doctoral training SCOPE Admission (formal requirements and objective procedures based on academic excellence and research potential) Introduction into the scientific community (writing papers for submission to peer-reviewed journals, presentation of results at conferences, training abroad…) Transferable skills (general research methods, academic writing and communication, research grant proposal writing, teacher training…) Research progress Assessment of thesis and final evaluation (objective and transparent, made by university expert committee without the supervisor as a member) METHODS Critical review of periodical progress reports (submitted by the candidate) Periodical review meetings milestone reviews (thesis proposal,..) Examinations (comprehensive,…) Seminars (presentations, discussions..) Progress reports by supervisor(s) Monitoring and assessment of candidates How often should periodical reviews take place? Who should be involved (besides the supervisor)? What examinations should the candidate take?
Some questions for further discussion How to increase and improve mobility of doctoral candidates and quality of mobility? Should all the tools (QF, LO, ECTS) used in the organisation of the first and second cycles programmes be applied in the third cycle? How to assure the excellence of doctoral training (assessment – supervision)?