IMPLICATIONS OF THE “BOLOGNA PROCESS” FOR MSCHE Jean Morse, President MSCHE Commission meeting March 5, 2009

OUTLINE AND ISSUES 1. OVERVIEW OF “BOLOGNA,” I.E. VARIOUS EUROPEAN PROCESSES BEING CREATED TO IMPROVE COMPARABILITY OF DEGREES AND TO EASE TRANSFER OF CREDIT 2. DESCRIPTION OF QUALIFICATION FRAMEWORKS 3. DISCUSSION OF WHETHER FOUNDATION – QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORK (I.E. DEFINITION OF DEGREES) SHOULD BE UNDERTAKEN IN THE U.S.

ELEMENTS of “BOLOGNA” DEGREE DEFINITION DEGREE CYCLES CREDIT TRANSFER (ECTS) DIPLOMA SUPPLEMENT QUALITY ASSURANCE GUIDELINES QUALIFICATION FRAMEWORKS TUNING PROGRAM GOALS

QUALITY ASSURANCE EUROPEAN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR: http://www.enqa.eu/files/ESG_3edition%20(2).pdf INTERNAL QA:HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS EXTERNAL QA OF HIGHER EDUCATION EXTERNAL QA AGENCIES EUROPEAN AGENCIES ARE REVIEWED AGAINST THESE STANDARDS TO JOIN THE EUROPEAN “REGISTER” OF QA AGENCIES

DEGREE CYCLES: “3+2+3” BACHELOR’S (180 – 240 ECTS) MASTER’S (90 – 120 ECTS) Ph.D. (approximately 180 – 240 credits) Nations moving from 5 year degrees to 3+2 have deep concerns as to use of the First Cycle degree US: significant % not accepting 3 Year UG degree for graduate study

ECTS European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System BASED ON STUDENT WORKLOAD, AND SOMETIMES, ON WEIGHTING OF CHALLENGE vs. US SYSTEM OF CREDITS BASED ON FACULTY CONTACT HOURS

DIPLOMA SUPPLEMENT CREDENTIAL, ITS LEVEL, ENTRY REQUIREMENTS, OFFICIAL DURATION DEGREE REQUIREMENTS, MODES OF STUDY, ENROLLMENT INTENSITY, AND COMPRESSED SIGNALS OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE PURPOSE OF THE CREDENTIAL TRANSCRIPT AND DESCRIPTION OF NATIONAL SYSTEM ARE APPENDED

“TUNING” DISCIPLINARY FRAMEWORKS INTENDED TO CREATE “REFERENCE POINTS” SO THAT THERE IS “CONVERGENCE” ACROSS COUNTRIES TO BE CREATED BY FACULTY PROJECTS ARE UNDERWAY IN SPECIFIC DISCIPLINES

TUNING, CONT’D DISCIPLINES TO ARTICULATE OUTLINES AND BENCHMARKS FOR: SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE GENERIC SKILLS AND COMPETENCIES INTERPERSONAL INSTRUMENTAL SYSTEMIC LEVELS OF MASTERY WITHIN SUBJECT

TUNING LEVELS SUBJECT DEPENDENT OUTCOMES FOR GENERAL LEARNING GENERAL COMPETENCY ACROSS DISCIPLINES (TRANSFERABLE SKILLS) LEVEL DESCRIPTORS FOR INDIVIDUAL COURSES THRESHHOLD VS. DESIRED OUTCOMES RELATIVE VS. ABSOLUTE VALUE OF CREDITS REGULAR VS. EXTRA-CHALLENGING

THE SYSTEM IN PRACTICE: COMMUNICATION SKILLS NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORK AND PROGRAM GOALS Qualifications Framework – Dublin General Qualifications Tuning subject dependent General Learning Outcomes (reference points) Tuning General, Competency Across Disciplines (Transferable skills)T59 Benchmarking (alternative to Tuning) Generic Skills in History (UK) Benchmarking (alternative to Tuning) Learning Outcomes Communicate Information, ideas, problems, and solutions to specialized and non-specialized audiences (18) BA – Communicate the basic knowledge of the field in coherent ways and in appropriate media (oral, written, graphic, etc.) p. 35 Level 1 – instrumental, interpersonal, and systemic (p. 37) Interpersonal includes ability to communicate with experts in other fields T 23 Communication Competence: structure, coherence, clarity and fluency both orally and in writing (p. 44) Clarity, fluency, and coherence in written expression and oral expression (H8) *Progression: AA: can communicate about their understanding, skills and activities with peers, supervisors, and clients; MA = can communicate their conclusions and the knowledge and rational underpinning these, to specialist and non-specialist audiences clearly and unambiguously

IN PRACTICE: COMMUNICATION SKILLS - COURSES AND TRANSCRIPTS Level Descriptors For individual courses Tuning Differentiates UK examples of knowledge and application Diploma Supplement proposal for U.S. – excerpts on learning Basic – introduction p. 58 Threshold vs. desired outcomes Apply knowledge to demonstrate comprehension of theory p.61 Qualification framework, if any Intermediate (deepen Basic knowledge) Relative vs .Absolute Value of credits T 53 Develop a distinctive approach to acquisition of knowledge Program requirements in major as objectives, Tuning type disciplinary requirements, credit distributions, etc. Advanced – strengthening expertise Regular vs. extra-challenging Programs T54 Generate ideas formulating responses to well defined and abstract problems Markers of student achievement beyond course content – research, etc. Specialized – subfields that open up at an advanced level Reviewing, consolidating, and extending knowledge

THE SYSTEM IN PRACTICE: SUMMARY OF COMMUNICATION SKILLS FRAMEWORK: COMMUNICATE INFORMATION, IDEAS,PROBLEMS, SOLUTIONS TO DIFFERENT AUDIENCES SUBJECT: COMMUNICATE BASIC KNOWLEDGE IN COHERENT WAYS IN DIFFERENT MEDIA GENERAL: ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE WITH EXPERTS LEVEL: INTRO, DEEPEN, EXPERTISE ALSO: THRESHOLD, RELATIVE VALUE, EXTRA-CHALLENGING DIPLOMA: MARKERS OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

QUALIFICATION FRAMEWORKS WHAT DOES EACH LEVEL OF DEGREE WE AWARD MEAN? WHAT DOES IT REPRESENT IN TERMS OF STUDENT LEARNING? HOW DOES IT DIFFER FROM LEVELS ABOVE AND BELOW IT?

TOP 3 DEGREE LEVELS LEVEL 6: Demonstrate mastery and innovation to solve complex and unpredictable problems in specialized field LEVEL 7: Specialized problem-solving skills required in research and innovation to develop and integrate new knowledge LEVEL 8: Most Advanced, including synthesis and evaluation, to solve critical problems in research/innovation and extend knowledge

LEARNING OUTCOMES 1. KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING: breadth and kind 2. APPLICATION OF KNOWLEDGE /UNDERSTANDING: range, selectivity 3. FLUENCY IN USE OF INCREASINGLY COMPLEX DATA AND INFORMATION BREADTH AND DEPTH OF TOPICS COMMUNICATED; RANGE OF AUDIENCES FOR COMMUNICATION DEGREE OF AUTONOMY GAINED FOR SUBSEQUENT LEARNING

IRISH FRAMEWORK COMPENDIUM, TAB 9, BLUE SHEET, DISPLAYS GRID OF: KNOWLEDGE (BREADTH AND KIND) KNOW-HOW AND SKILL (RANGE, SELECTIVITY) COMPETENCE (CONTEXT, ROLE LEARNING TO LEARN, AND INSIGHT) WITH LEVEL INDICATORS FOR EACH LEVEL

CANADIAN FRAMEWORK COMPENDIUM, TAB 9, YELLOW PAGES DEGREE DESCRIPTION FOR: PREPARATION FOR EMPLOYMENT LENGTH OF PROGRAM ADMISSION REQUIREMENTS

CANADA, CONT’D DEGREE-LEVEL STANDARDS FOR: DEPTH AND BREADTH OF KNOWLEDGE KNOWLEDGE OF METHODOLOGIES AND RESEARCH APPLICATION OF KNOWLEDGE COMMUNICATION SKILLS AWARENESS OF LIMITS OF KNOWLEDGE PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY/AUTONOMY

APPLICATION TO U.S DO WE ALREADY HAVE A FORMAL SYSTEM THAT IS MORE FLEXIBLE? ACCREDITORS: REQUIRE LEARNING GOALS USE PEERS TO ADDRESS LEVEL OF GOALS REQUIRE GENERAL EDUCATION STATES SET PROGRAM LENGTH AND MONITOR OTHER AREAS TRADITION REGARDING MAJORS JOHN NICHOLS - AACU

ISSUES WHETHER OR NOT NEEDED, SHOULD THE U.S. HAVE A QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORK FOR PURPOSES OF TRANSFER WITH OTHER COUNTRIES? WHO WOULD CREATE AND ENFORCE IT?

DISCIPLINARYASSOCIATIONS COULD ACCREDITORS MOTIVATE NATIONAL DISCIPLINARY ASSOCIATIONS TO DEFINE LEARNING GOALS AND MEASURES BY STATING THAT INSTITUTIONS USING THOSE WOULD BE DEEMED TO COMPLY WITH STUDENT LEARNING REQUIREMENTS? INSTITUTIONS COULD ELECT WHETHER OR NOT TO USE THEM

DISCIPLINARY ASSOCIATIONS HAVE EXPERTISE FACULTY BUY-IN “ASSESSMENT IN POLITICAL SCIENCE” (APSA 2009) “ASSESSMENT IN HISTORY: (AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION)

AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION –10 GOALS WWW. APA AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION –10 GOALS WWW.APA.ORG/ED/CRITIQUE_GOALS.HTML COMMUNICATION INFORMATION AND IT SOCIOCULTURAL AWARENESS PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT CAREER PLANNING KNOWLEDGE BASE RESEARCH METHODS CRITICAL THINKING APPLICATION VALUES

NEXT STEPS THERE MAY BE FOUNDATION GRANT MONEY AVAILABLE. REGIONAL ACCREDITORS HAVE DISCUSSED PARTICIPATING IN A PROJECT WITH A NATIONAL ORGANIZATION INVOLVED. WHAT, IF ANYTHING, SHOULD MSCHE DO?