A N
R O I N N
OIDEACHAIS
AGUS SCILEANNA
DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION
AND SKILLS
TAKING STOCK: TEN YEARS OF THE
BOLOGNA PROCESS IN IRELAND
Edwin Mernagh
Contents
Introduction
3
Looking back on the Bologna decade
4
The Bologna Process in Ireland – achievements and milestones
8
Ireland’s role in Bologna
14
2010 and beyond
16
Appendices
1.
List of ministerial meetings in the Bologna Process, 1999-2010
18
2.
Correspondences established between the FQEHEA cycles and the NFQ and EQF Levels
19
3.
Explanation of acronyms used in this report
20
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
1
Edwin Mernagh
Edwin Mernagh’s interest, expertise and experience
lie in development processes, particularly in the fields
of qualifications systems (including qualifications
frameworks and credit systems), in the interface
between learning and the world of work and in
vocational education and training systems generally.
From its establishment in 2001 to 2007, Edwin
Mernagh was a member of the development team of the National Qualifications Authority of Ireland. He had a particular focus on the European dimension
of the work of the Authority, representing Ireland on committees and working groups in relation to the European Qualifications Framework (EQF) and the European Credit system for VET (ECVET).
Since 2007, as an independent consultant, Edwin
has worked mostly in an international context. He
has continued to assist the European Commission in
various initiatives, including the ongoing development
and implementation of the EQF: he is a current
member of the Commission’s EQF Team. He has
undertaken several technical studies for the alignment
and ‘referencing’ of qualifications frameworks; the
formal referencing of the Irish and UK frameworks
to EQF; and a comparison of the Irish and Australian
qualifications frameworks. He has also undertaken
studies for CEDEFOP on issues related to qualifications
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
systems and vocational education and training, support
2
activities for the development of a Turkish qualifications
framework (on behalf of ETF) and collaborative policy
analysis activities with OECD. He is a consultant
in framework development with the Qualifications
Framework Project in the United Arab Emirates.
Introduction
The Bologna Process began in 1999 as an initiative
The Bologna Process is a key feature of contemporary
of Ministers of Education who came together in the
European international education. Ireland has
Italian city which is home to what is claimed to be the
demonstrated strong support from the outset. The
western world’s oldest university. Established in the
timing of the Declaration co-incided neatly with
11th century, the word “universitas” was first used at
developments that were being initiated in Ireland. In
the foundation of this great institution which numbers
a way, it can be argued that Bologna can be seen as
Dante, Copernicus, Durer and Umberto Eco among its
a useful endorsement of the steps being taken in this
famous alumni.
country to enhance our higher education system.
A millennium later, the name of Bologna is still
This review is timely coming shortly after the
resonating in European higher education circles. This
publication of Ireland’s International Education
influence is however not confined to within Europe’s
Strategy 2010-15. This report in its introduction states
borders. Today, 47 countries are signatories, from
“Ireland’s National Framework of Qualifications (NFQ)
Ireland in the west to Kazakhstan in the east. Many
and the European Qualifications Framework (EQF)
other parts of the world particularly in North and South
facilitate worldwide recognition of Irish qualifications.
America, Australia and New Zealand are also paying
In short, Ireland has an opportunity to become
close attention to this higher education reform process.
internationally recognised and ranked as a world leader
Ireland was one of the original 29 member states
and in this review, Edwin Mernagh charts the
progress of the Bologna Process in this country as
well as highlighting how the sector has responded
to the challenges posed by the aims and objectives
outlined in the original declaration and its subsequent
in the delivery of high-quality international education.”1
This is but one area that the Bologna Process has
played a particularly strong role in stimulating
advancement. It is likely that Bologna will continue
to leave its mark on other areas of higher education
systems in the years ahead.
refinements. This review was commissioned by
The HEA and the NQAI would like to express
the Higher Education Authority (HEA), Ireland’s
their sincere appreciation to Edwin Mernagh for
planning and development body for higher education
his professionalism and expertise in preparing this
and research, in partnership with the National
document.
Qualifications Authority of Ireland (NQAI) to mark
October 2010
questions for the next ten years and beyond.
Although not an initiator of the Bologna Declaration,
today the European Commission is playing a key
role in assisting in the realisation of the aims and
objectives. As the National Agency for the Lifelong
Learning Programme: Erasmus, the HEA is active in
complementing the work of the Bologna Experts, the
Department of Education and Skills, the NQAI, the
Union of Students in Ireland, the higher education
institutions and their representative bodies and other
stakeholders in furthering the advancement of the
initiative.
1
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
the first decade of participation and to pose some
Investing in Global Relationships, Ireland’s International
Education Strategy 2010-15, Department of Education and Skills,
Dublin 2010, p 21.
3
Looking back on the Bologna decade
The Bologna Process has brought about a gradual but
Over the ten-year period since the Declaration,
irreversible change in the higher education systems
successive biennial ministerial meetings have refined
of Europe since it was initiated following the Bologna
and extended these objectives and set out guidelines
Declaration in 1999. What exactly is this ‘process’?
for the Bologna Process in a series of Communiqués
How does it work? Who are the stakeholders that bear
(see appendix 1, page 18, for a listing of these
responsibility for the changes taking place? Where
meetings and also www.eurireland.ie). Thus, in an
does the Bologna Process fit into the overall web of
iterative way, the original agenda has been broadened:
European policy development?
for example, the concept of the social dimension of
The Bologna process: what it is.
European higher education policies. At the same time,
countries signed the Bologna Declaration. The
continuous development has given greater precision
Declaration marks a turning point in the development
to the instruments through which the Bologna Process
of higher education in Europe: essentially, it affirms
is activated. The undergraduate/postgraduate degree
a commitment by these 29 countries to reform the
structure proposed in the Declaration has been modified
structures of their higher education systems in a
into a three-cycle system, which now incorporates the
convergent way. The Declaration set out an action
concept of qualifications frameworks, with an emphasis
programme designed to attain a clearly defined goal,
on learning outcomes. The system is now underpinned
with a firm deadline and a set of specified objectives.
by European standards and guidelines for quality
The Bologna Process is the realisation of this action
assurance. By March 2010, the cohort of participating
programme: its goal is the creation of a ‘European
countries had grown to 47 and their ministers of
Higher Education Area’ (EHEA) by 2010.
higher education marked the launch of the EHEA out in the 1999 Bologna Declaration:
• ‘Adoption of a system of easily readable and
comparable degrees…’
• ‘Adoption of a system essentially based on two
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
of qualifications is now clearly perceived as central to
The Bologna Process began in 1999 when 29
The objectives of the Bologna Process, as set
4
higher education has been introduced and recognition
main cycles, undergraduate and graduate…’
• ‘Establishment of a system of credits–such as
at a conference in Budapest and Vienna in 2010.
The most visible element of the Bologna Process, from
the perspective of the higher education community
generally, is the suite of ‘instruments’ developed to
address the objectives of the 1999 Declaration. Of
particular note is the infrastructure of qualifications
frameworks now under construction throughout
European higher education (see panel, page 5). This
European Credit Transfer and Accumulation
comprises national frameworks of higher education
System (ECTS) …’
qualifications, to be introduced in all participating
• ‘Promotion of mobility by overcoming obstacles
to the effective exercise of free movement...’
• ‘Promotion of European co-operation in quality
assurance, with a view to developing comparable
criteria and methodologies.’
• ‘Promotion of the necessary European dimensions
in higher education...’
countries, and a European ‘meta-framework’ to which national systems can relate, the Framework of Qualifications for the European Higher Education
Area (FQEHEA).
Qualifications frameworks: a key instrument in
the Bologna Process.
The Berlin ministerial communiqué, in 2003,
recognised the key role of qualifications frameworks
in addressing the objective of ‘a system of easily
readable and comparable degrees’:
a compendium of standards, procedures and guidelines
on quality assurance for use in the EHEA, and provide
the underpinning of trust on which FQEHEA depends.
Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance
The Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance
in the European Higher Education Area (QA-EHEA)
‘Ministers encourage the member States to elaborate
are a compendium of standards, procedures and
a framework of comparable and compatible
guidelines on quality assurance for use in the EHEA.
qualifications for their higher education systems,
The European Association for Quality Assurance
which should seek to describe qualifications in terms
in Higher Education (ENQA) was the driving force
of workload, level, learning outcomes, competences
behind the development of the standards and
and profile. They also undertake to elaborate an
guidelines, with support from EUA, EURASHE and
overarching framework of qualifications for the
ESIB. Their purpose is to enhance processes for
European Higher Education Area.’
quality assurance in higher education at institutional,
national and European level by developing shared
In response to this call, countries have begun the task
criteria and methodologies on quality assurance.
of developing frameworks to describe and compare
While not intrinsically a qualifications-related
their higher education qualifications. At the European
initiative, having a wider relevance to the quality
level, following a rapid development process, the
assurance agenda of the EHEA generally, these
Framework of Qualifications for the European Higher
guidelines are nevertheless an important support
Education Area (FQEHEA) was adopted at the
mechanism for the EHEA framework of qualifications
ministerial meeting in Bergen in 2005.
and their development has been undertaken in a
The FQEHEA is an overarching framework
comprising three cycles. Generic descriptors for each
cycle are based primarily on learning outcomes,
and ECTS credit ranges define the volume of
qualifications in the first and second cycles. The
Descriptors’ (a product of the work of the Joint
Quality Initiative, 2002-2004).
The European Credit Transfer System (ECTS) originated
in the EU Erasmus programme, but it has now become
a pillar in the Bologna process, and ECTS credits are
a key mechanism in the definition of the FQEHEA
cycles. The ‘Standards and Guidelines for Quality
Assurance in the European Higher Education Area’ are
overall Bologna process.
The launch of the EHEA in 2010, while fulfilling the
commitment made in the 1999 Declaration, does not
represent the end of the Bologna Process. It does mark
a shift in focus from the development of instruments
and protocols to the task of promoting and supporting
the implementation of the Bologna reforms in the real
world of organisational and administrative structures
and practices of higher education. The Leuven/
Louvain-la-Neuve Communiqué of 2009 set out the
main working areas for the next decade, addressing
a much wider and less concrete set of objectives,
compared with those of the original Declaration.
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
cycle descriptors were developed from the ‘Dublin
way that is coherent with FQEHEA, as part of the
5
The Bologna Process priorities beyond 2010:
• Qualifications frameworks/three-cycle system
• Joint degrees
• Mobility
education in the participating countries) in order to
assess the progress made towards the Process objectives
and to decide on any new steps to be taken. To ensure
the implementation of the ministerial decisions, the
EHEA makes use of several support structures.
• Quality assurance
The main support structure is the Bologna Follow-up
• Employability
• Lifelong learning
• The EHEA in a global context
• Doctoral studies and synergies between the
EHEA and the European Research Area
How the process works
Group (BFUG). The BFUG oversees the Bologna Process
between the ministerial meetings. It may establish
working groups to deal with specific topics in more
detail; it also receives input from Bologna Seminars. The
BFUG is composed of representatives of all members
of the Bologna Process. The BFUG is co-chaired by
the country holding the EU Presidency and a non-EU
country, rotating every six months. The vice-chair is the
country organising the next Ministerial Conference.
The Bologna Declaration is not a reform imposed upon
A Board oversees the work of the Bologna Follow-up
national governments or higher education institutions.
Group.
Rather, the reform is being implemented through a
voluntary process driven by a proactive combination of
ministerial decision-making and co-operative activity on
the part of the higher education stakeholders. It is not
based on any treaties, formal divisions of responsibilities
or decision-making protocols. Its success relies on the
extent to which ministers implement decided measures
at national level and on the buy-in of higher education
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
(meetings of the ministers responsible for higher
• Recognition
• Social dimension
6
Every two years Ministerial Conferences are organised
institutions which have significant autonomy in most
participating countries. Although it is voluntary, the
Bologna Process has been highly effective in bringing
forward measures that radically impact on national
higher education and training systems.
The members of the Bologna Process comprise the 47
participating countries, together with the European
Commission, and a group of consultative members,
namely the Council of Europe, UNESCO-CEPES, EUA,
ESU, EURASHE, ENQA, Education International and
BUSINESSEUROPE (the Confederation of European
Business).
The overall follow-up work is supported by a
Secretariat, provided at any given time by the country
hosting the next Ministerial Conference. The Bologna
Secretariat supports the work of the BFUG and its
Board, as well as Working Groups, Networks and
Seminars. The Secretariat prepares draft agenda,
draft reports, notes and minutes and carries out the
practical preparation for meetings. A further task of
the Secretariat is to provide up-to-date and reliable
information about the Bologna Process (for both
European and non-European audiences) and to
maintain an electronic archive.
The Bologna Process and other European
developments
The Bologna Process is a reform initiative in the
area of European higher education; however, it is
unfolding in the context of parallel developments in
other areas of education and training, particularly
in the context of the EU macro-objective of making
a European area of lifelong learning a reality. These
parallels are, in some instances, direct: a European
credit system for VET is being developed (ECVET)
that is a close equivalent of ECTS and the EQAVET
Quality Assurance Reference Framework fulfils
largely the same function as the ENQA standards and
guidelines. There are also two overarching European
initiatives in relation to qualifications – Europass and
the EQF – that encompass all sectors of education
and training. Europass documents elaborate the
meaning of qualifications, including those of higher
education. The European Qualifications Framework for
Lifelong Learning (EQF) shares many conceptual and
operational features with FQEHEA: both are European
meta-frameworks of qualifications and both are based
on learning outcomes. The policy documents that
underpin EQF and FQEHEA frequently refer to one
another and set out how they should relate, to the
extent that the EQF Recommendation2 sets out the
relationship between EQF levels and FQEHEA cycles
(see appendix 2). Operationally, there is formal cross-representation between the governing bodies
and co-ordinating agents of these two instruments. It is clear that the Bologna Process is already strongly
integrated into the wider matrix of European policy
and there is obvious potential for building on the level
of synergy that already exists so that these parallel
initiatives continue to develop in a coherent and
complementary way.
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
2
The Recommendation of the European Parliament and Council
establishing EQF, available at http://ec.europa.eu/education/
lifelong-learning-policy/doc44_en.htm
7
The Bologna Process in Ireland
– achievements and milestones
Ireland started from a strong position when joining the
In a similar manner, another significant goal in national
Bologna Process in 1999, as the Irish higher education
policy at the time of joining Bologna was to increase
system was already broadly in conformity with the
equality in access to higher education. This was
3-cycle structure that emerged as the Bologna model.
reflected, for example, in the Universities Act (1997)
Also, some key reforms associated with Bologna were
charging the institutions with promoting and preserving
effectively occurring in parallel at the Irish level, where
equality of opportunity and access. The equity of
national initiatives were under way that reflected key
access goal was strongly pursued in Ireland over the ten
elements of the Bologna objectives. In other words,
years from 1999, with the establishment of a National
the Irish experience is in many ways about a parallel
Access Office under the aegis of the Higher Education
process of national reform, driven largely by national
Authority and the development and implementation
policy objectives rather than a perceived need to
of a coherent strategy to increase participation by
comply with an external process.
under-represented societal groups in higher education.
The rationalisation and reform of the qualifications
These goals are best interpreted as national policy
system was already a key national goal when
objectives stemming from national concerns, which
Ireland became involved with Bologna. Legislation
would have been goals for Ireland without the Bologna
to underpin a reform strategy, the Qualifications
Process but which are compatible with it.
(Education and Training) Act, was enacted in 1999.
An organisational infrastructure to lead the reform
process was put in place by 20013, leading very quickly
to the development of the National Framework of
Qualifications (NFQ) as the single, integrated system
in Ireland for defining the relationship between
education and training awards. The core organisations
involved are the National Qualifications Authority
of Ireland (NQAI) and the two awards councils,
FETAC and HETAC, but other pre-existing agencies
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
were active partners in the reform process, including
8
the Higher Education Authority, the Conference
of Heads of Irish Universities (now known as the
Irish Universities Association), the Irish Universities
Quality Board and the Dublin Institute of Technology.
This infrastructure provided Ireland with a centre of
knowledge and expertise in qualifications-related
fields, as well as a group of dedicated qualificationsfocused agencies, that were a key resource in Ireland’s
interface with European developments such as the
Bologna Process and, latterly, EQF.
3
however, primary responsibility for Ireland’s linkage with the
Bologna Process lies with the Department of Education and
Skills. To advise the Department on policy issues arising out of
this linkage, a national steering group has been established. It is
chaired by the Department and has nominees of the IUA (formerly
CHIU), the Council of Directors of the Institutes of Technology,
the Dublin Institute of Technology, the HEA, HETAC and NQAI.
On the whole, therefore, the early engagement by the
Irish higher education community with the Bologna
Process could be described as ‘low key’ – as compared
with the situation in many other countries, where
the challenges of structural reform were immediate
and profound. This was due to the largely ‘Bolognacompliant’ nature of the Irish higher education system,
as well as the pre-occupation of most key stakeholders
with the parallel developments at the national level.
However, looking beyond the overall systemic reform
issue, the ongoing challenges have been largely at the
more specific level of institutional reform, in the effort
to fully implement changes such as the introduction of
modularisation, course and specific award descriptors,
and transferable credit systems.
The Bologna Process Independent Assessment
Degree system reform in Ireland
(CHEPS, INCHER-Kassel, Ecotec, 2009)4, looking at
As the Bologna Process began to focus on the need
progress in Ireland over the first decade of working
for instruments to support the drive towards a
on the European Higher Education Area, identifies a
system of readable and comparable degrees, the Irish
number of learning points from the Irish experience
involvement intensified. The Berlin Communiqué,
that can contribute to practice in other countries:
in 2003, called for the establishment of national
• Establishing a legislative basis to back the
implementation of reform.
• Getting an appropriate infrastructure in place as a
qualifications frameworks for higher education in all
participating countries; it also led to the setting up
of the Bologna Follow-Up Group, with a mandate to
develop an overarching qualifications framework for
necessary pre-condition to facilitate a qualifications
the EHEA. The Irish NFQ was launched about a month
framework development process.
after Berlin, so that compliance with that particular
• Deciding on a clear development and
implementation plan and strategy.
• Establishing executive agencies (separate to the
protocol was virtually instantaneous!
This important milestone was followed in July 2004
by the adoption of the NFQ award types as the
main Ministry concerned with higher education, if
generic qualifications for use throughout Irish higher
appropriate), in order to create dedicated knowledge
education. At the Bergen ministerial meeting in 2005,
centres with the technical expertise required to, for
the Framework of Qualifications for the European
example, develop and implement quality assurance
Higher Education Area (FQEHEA) was adopted. As
procedures and qualifications reform.
the acceptance and validity of this new overarching
• The benefit of extensive partnership working with a
great deal of formal and informal contact between
relevant agencies.
framework was clearly dependent on its ability to
generate trust and confidence amongst the higher
education community, a ‘self-certification’ process
was proposed to be undertaken by each participating
country seeking to link its national framework to
widespread buy-in that can then be used to
FQEHEA. The Bologna Follow Up Group invited
encourage, structure and facilitate wider reforms
Ireland to undertake self-certification of the NFQ as
that follow.
a pilot project. The report5 on this project verified the
• Allowing sufficient time for stakeholders to
understand and buy into significant changes.
• Balancing funding-related incentives with legislative
force to encourage institutional compliance with
national objectives.
compatibility of the NFQ with FQEHEA, in accordance
with the criteria and procedures set out, including the
involvement of two international experts as members
of the steering committee for the compatibility
process. The report was published in November
2006. Ireland was thus the first country to complete
this aspect of engagement with the Bologna Process.
Subsequently, in June 2009,
4
available at http://ec.europa.eu/education/higher-education/
doc1290_en.htm , and through the CHEPS website: www.
utwente.nl/cheps/publications.
5
The final verification report certifying the compatibility of the
NFQ and the Bologna Framework is available here: http://www.
nqai.ie/publication_nov2006.html
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
• Placing priority on developing a clear NQF with
9
a report establishing the referencing of the NFQ to
• The Framework Implementation Network (FIN) was
the EQF was published. The NFQ thus forms the
set up by the IUA and NQAI in 2007 to provide a
first bridge, established in practice, between the two
collaborative space in which practitioners from the
European meta-frameworks of qualifications. The
university sector can discuss and propose ways of
correspondences between the NFQ, EQF and FQEHEA
addressing the challenges of implementing NFQ
are summarised in a diagram at appendix 2, page 19.
and Bologna reforms, and communicate these ideas
to their colleagues across higher education for
While Irish organisations were busily engaged in
consideration. FIN working parties have developed
addressing Bologna criteria at the systemic level, the
and published6 practical guides and support
higher education community at large was facing the
materials on themes that are directly relevant to
challenge of implementing the changes arising out of
professionals such as programme designers:
the Bologna reforms. In the front line were the higher
- The Technical Aspects of Designing
education institutions and the awarding bodies and
Programmes/Awards for Inclusion in the NFQ
their various practitioners – teachers and lecturers,
programme designers and course co-ordinators,
- Discipline Specific Learning Outcomes: Some
registrars and development officers and many more.
Case Studies, Reference Points, Issues and Insights
The award-type descriptors introduced as part of the
apparatus of the NFQ, and adopted in 2004 for use
- A guide to Good Practice for the Assessment of
throughout the higher education sector, are quite
Learning Outcomes
generic: considerable further development is required
to elaborate these generic descriptors for specific
Establishment of a system of credits
fields of learning and the ultimate goal is to identify
The Irish NFQ Framework was introduced without
the required learning outcomes not just at the level
a credit system as such, but it does have associated
of the major award but for all programmes, courses,
principles and operational guidelines for the
modules and units. This task is being addressed
implementation of a national approach to credit in Irish
through a myriad of ‘on-the-ground’ initiatives, higher education and training. As the implementation
with some significant support at systemic level:
of the NFQ has proceeded, and as these principles and
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
• HETAC has used Framework learning outcome
10
descriptors to set standards from 2003 onwards.
It co-ordinated a radical revision of standards
throughout the Institutes of Technology in
2003/2004, so that all programmes/major awards
were revalidated to meet major award-type
descriptors. The award-type descriptors were
adopted as the basis for standards in all fields
guidelines are increasingly observed, arrangements for
the use of credit in higher education institutions have
converged. By 2008, credit systems, based on ECTS,
were incorporated into the programme validation
requirements of HETAC and the DIT. Increasingly, all
the universities are implementing ECTS, partly in line
with the Framework principles and guidelines, but also
in response to the Bologna agenda.
pending the development of standards for specific
It is therefore reasonable to assert that credit
fields of learning. Standards have since been
arrangements compatible with ECTS are now in use
developed in several fields.
throughout the higher education and training system.
• The Dublin Institute of Technology has
implemented the use of learning outcomes in
respect of all of its programmes leading to awards
within the National Framework of Qualifications.
6
University awards and the National Framework of Qualifications
(NFQ): Issues around the Design of Programmes and the Use
and Assessment of Learning Outcomes; available at http://www.
nfqnetwork.ie/A_Guide_to_designing_UNiversity_Awards_
for_Inclusion_in_the_National_Framework_of_Qualifications/
Default.132.html
Mobility
Its role generally is to encourage a pro-active approach
Apart from the progress made in relation to the
to quality assurance and to increase inter-university
facilitation of international student exchanges
co-operation in instituting quality assurance processes
though the use of ECTS, the main activity to address
and procedures. In this, IUQB is able to build on often
the mobility objective has been to encourage the
long-standing engagement with quality assurance in
issuing of Diploma Supplements. Almost all of the
separate universities, codified in the 1997 Universities
Irish higher education institutions are now issuing
Act. The IUQB conducts regular external reviews
Supplements and most of them recognise Diploma
of the effectiveness of quality procedures in Irish
Supplements presented by foreign students applying
universities; provides information on quality assurance
for courses. The Bologna Process national report refers
to stakeholders; promotes quality assurance in Irish
to this development as a ‘growing concept’ amongst
universities; partners with the universities on quality
institutions, although the objective of having Diploma
assurance and enhancement initiatives; and publishes
Supplements issued to all graduates ‘universally and free
and promotes national guidelines of good practice on
of charge’ has yet to be achieved. It is clear that progress
various higher education themes. IUQB operates in
has been made, due in some measure to the efforts
line with national legislation and the ENQA Standards
of working/steering groups established by relevant
and Guidelines.
agencies to progress widespread adoption in the sector.
Outside the university sector, HETAC has statutory
As for the principles of the Lisbon National Recognition
responsibility for agreeing and monitoring institutional
Convention, some progress has been made in
quality assurance processes, as well as having a direct
implementing these, although this is more at the
overseeing role for setting standards and validating
national policy and infrastructure level rather than in
higher education programmes. The policy put in place
institutional implementation on the ground. A leading
by HETAC to support its role in this area is set out
role was taken by the NQAI and key partner agencies
in the 2002 publication ‘Guidelines and Criteria for
in producing an initial outline for a national approach
Quality Assurance Procedures in Higher Education
to the recognition of international awards in 2004 and
and Training’. These Guidelines require all providers
in developing the subsequent National Action Plan for
of higher education and training programmes within
HETAC’s remit to establish quality assurance procedures
NARIC service that operates firmly under the Lisbon
and agree those procedures with HETAC. Regular
Convention and that works increasingly closely with
reviews are then conducted by independent panels the institutions to spread the Lisbon message.
of experts, operating under the auspices of HETAC.
Quality Assurance
Perhaps the most significant Irish quality assurance
In relation to quality assurance, Ireland has made
significant progress in the development of a
supporting infrastructure to advance and develop
quality assurance processes across the different higher
education sectors. The establishment of the Irish
Universities Quality Board (IUQB) in 2002, in which
the HEA played a key role, was a key development.
Since then, IUQB has established itself as an important voice in the area of quality assurance. initiative in the context of Bologna was the 2003
decision to establish the Irish Higher Education Quality
Network (IHEQN), covering all of higher education
including the universities, Institutes of Technology
and other higher education providers. IHEQN’s
membership includes the key bodies with a stake in
quality assurance in higher education including the
Department of Education and Skills, HETAC, IUQB,
HEA, NQAI and Irish Universities Association along
with institutional representation from universities,
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
recognition in 2006. There is now in place a dedicated
11
DIT and other Institutes of Technology and student
The Experts comprise six senior academics and
representation in the shape of the Union of Students
administrators and one student representative who
in Ireland (USI). IHEQN was established to provide
have been chosen because of their in-depth knowledge
a forum for these stakeholders to meet and seek to
in quality assurance, qualifications frameworks and
establish a common national position on key quality
recognition issues in higher education. Broad areas assurance issues, principles and approaches. This, for
of activity for the Bologna Experts include:
example, included drafting common principles for
student involvement in quality assurance, principles
for follow-through on quality improvements and for
reviewing quality assurance procedures, and a code
of practice for dealing with international students.
The role of the network also includes linking in with
the Bologna Process, and informing ongoing quality
assurance debates and progress at the European level.
Bologna Experts
The implementation of the Bologna Process is facilitated
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
Process and related Irish policy developments to Irish higher education institutions.
• Promotion of quality assurance.
• Promotion of knowledge and understanding of
qualifications frameworks
• Promotion of ECTS and Diploma Supplement.
Milestones in the Bologna Process in Ireland
nationally by seven Bologna Experts who provide a
From the above description of the unfolding of the
resource to the wider higher education community
Bologna Process in Ireland, a number of achievements
in responding to the challenges of the Process. The
can be identified that represented significant steps
Experts were selected by the national agency for
forward or that set in place structures that have proved
Lifelong Learning Programme-Erasmus in Ireland (HEA)
to be key resources in the promotion of change. These
and approved by the Department of Education and
‘milestones’ are illustrated in Table 1, page 13, where
Skills in consultation with the national steering group
they can be considered in relation to the key events at
established to oversee the implementation of the
the European level in the same years.
Bologna Process.
12
• Dissemination of the relevance of the Bologna
Table 1: Milestones in the Bologna Process
Ireland
Ireland joins the process
Year
Europe
1998
Sorbonne Declaration
1999
Bologna Declaration
Decision to create a European Higher
Education Area (EHEA)
2000
Development of National Framework of
2001
Prague Communique
Qualifications (NFQ) begins
Joint Quality Initiative (JQI) begins its work
2002
in Dublin
IUQB is established
NFQ is launched
2003
IHEQN is established
Berlin Communique
Bologna Follow-Up Group (BFUG)
established
Objectives are set out: an overarching
Framework of Qualifications for EHEA
(FQEHEA) and national qualifications
frameworks in each country
New range of Framework awards adopted
2004
for higher education in Ireland
BFUG begins work on FQEHEA,
BFUG begins its work in Dublin
Ireland is asked to undertake pilot
incorporating the Dublin Descriptors
2005
Bergen Communique
FQEHEA adopted
2006
with FQEHEA–final report
Framework Implementation Network is
2007
London Communique
established
2008
2009
Leuven Communique
2010
Budapest/Vienna Declaration
Launch of EHEA
Target date for NQFs in all countries
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
referencing to FQEHEA
Verification of compatibility of Irish NFQ
Dublin Descriptors are introduced by JQI.
13
Ireland’s role in Bologna
Ireland’s participation in the Bologna process has
was established in 2003, following the Berlin
of Bologna reforms to the Irish system. Even though
Communiqué, and Ireland was, of course,
the reform required in Ireland was not extreme,
represented on the BFUG. At a Meeting in
Ireland has been at the forefront of the Process and
Dublin in March 2004, the BFUG approved
has contributed very strongly, both in representative
the establishment of a small Working Group to
groups and in the technical development of Bologna
co-ordinate the development of an overarching
instruments and procedures.
framework of qualifications for the EHEA. Irish
Ireland was one of the original group of 29 countries
that decided to work towards a European Area of
Higher Education and that committed to reform their
higher education systems in a convergent way. From
this beginning, Irish involvement in the representative
structures of the Bologna Process has been consistent
and committed. Irish ministers and officials contributed
strongly to the work involved in the series of ministerial
meetings that have been the driving force of the
Process. As working parties began to form to explore
the technical aspects of the proposed reform, Irish
Working Group, which drew heavily on the work
of the Joint Quality Initiative (who had formulated
and further developed the ‘Dublin Descriptors’)
and on experiences in countries that had already
established qualifications frameworks for their
national higher education systems – Ireland was a
key example. The work of this Group led directly
to the formulation of the FQEHEA, which was
adopted at the Bergen ministerial meeting in 2005.
• The European Network for Quality Assurance
in Higher Education was established in 2000
contributions to the agendas of these groups:
to promote European co-operation in the field
as it became clear that the structure of cycles
introduced through Bologna needed to be
supplemented by more detail on the outcomes of
these cycles, a group of higher education specialists
from several countries began to meet under the
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
representatives and experts participated in this
agencies and experts took part and made significant
• After the Prague Ministerial Conference (2001),
14
• The Bologna Follow Up Group (BFUG)
not been confined to the matter of the application
umbrella of the Joint Quality Initiative. This
grouping developed a set of descriptors that have
come to be referred to as the ‘Dublin Descriptors’
as the original draft was finalised at a meeting
of quality assurance. The HEA and HETAC were
members and the NQAI was an associate member.
This Network played a key role in bringing about the
European dimension to quality assurance which is
part of the implementation process of the Bologna
Declaration. In 2004 the Network was transformed
into the European Association for Quality
Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA). HEA,
HETAC, IUQB and NQAI are members of ENQA.
• The European Quality Assurance Register for
hosted by the NQAI in Dublin Castle in February
Higher Education (EQAR) was founded by ENQA,
2002. This collaborative exercise involved Irish,
ESU, EUA and EURASHE, the European representative
as well as Dutch, German, Flemish, UK, Spanish,
bodies of quality assurance agencies, students,
Danish, Swedish and Norwegian agencies.
universities and other higher education institutions,
• Launched in 2000, Tuning Educational Structures
in Europe (TUNING) is a university driven project,
which aims to offer higher education institutions a
concrete approach to implementing the Bologna
Process. TUNING has contributed significantly to
the elaboration of the FQEHEA. Irish universities
have been active participants in TUNING from its
inception.
respectively. Its purpose is to improve the quality
of European higher education by allowing students
and employers to identify which higher education
institutions or study programmes have undergone
quality reviews by trustworthy and credible quality
assurance. EQAR is a register of quality assurance
agencies that substantially comply with the European
Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance.
HETAC and IUQB are now on the EQAR register.
The Irish willingness to commit to Bologna was again
emphasised when, in 2005, the Irish authorities
acceded to a request from BFUG to undertake as a
pilot project the self-certification of the compatibility
of the Irish NFQ with the FQEHEA. This was the first
exploration of the criteria and procedures devised for
the referencing of national frameworks to the Bologna
framework. The results of the project were published
in 2006, so that Ireland became the first country to
reference its system to FQEHEA.
Ireland has also taken a proactive role in the
development of the European Qualifications
Framework for Lifelong Learning (EQF). Among
Irish priorities in this commitment was the need to
ensure clear compatibility between the EQF and
FQEHEA, and this objective was achieved as the EQF
Recommendation sets out formally how the two
frameworks inter-relate.
It may be observed that Ireland has been able to make
an exceptionally strong contribution to aspects of
the Bologna Process. That this was possible is partly
due to the coincidence of Irish qualifications system
development with the development phase of Bologna.
Agencies had been put in place in Ireland whose remit
was specifically focused on qualifications systems
and these organisations had available people with
current expertise and familiarity with the discourse
development. Taking into account the availability of
expertise and resources, and also the willingness of
the Irish authorities to get involved at key points in the
Bologna Process, it is not surprising that much of the
philosophy and many features of the Irish approach to
qualifications frameworks are reflected in elements of
the Bologna infrastructure.
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
– in effect, specialists in qualifications systems
15
2010 and beyond
It can be said with justification that Ireland has been
A further example of the need for further progress in
a leader in the development phase of the Bologna
consolidating the systemic reforms at the institutional
Process, and that systemic alignment with the
level is found in the Mobility agenda, in relation to
Bologna reforms has been achieved. What about the
Diploma Supplements. While it is now the case that
consolidation and implementation that now ensues?
Irish higher education institutions are issuing Diploma
What about the new, less tangible priorities set out for
Supplements to graduates who request them, it is by
Bologna in the Leuven Communiqué? Can Ireland again
no means universal that Supplements are issued to all
show a lead in making the Bologna changes real and
graduates ‘automatically and free of charge’, as was
lasting, in inserting concepts such as the use of learning
intended in the Europass policy. The apparent lack of
outcomes into the fabric of higher education? What are
any strong demand for Supplements from graduates or
the areas of future development where Ireland might
employers suggests that the mobility strategy within
want to make a contribution at the European level?
the Bologna Process may need to be reviewed at both
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
Looking first at the issue of consolidating the
16
national and European levels.
implementation of the Bologna reforms in Ireland,
Another issue arises out of the generic nature of the
the 2009 Bologna Process Independent Assessment
compatibility established between the Irish NFQ and
identifies a notable challenge remaining in the need
FQEHEA: while this compatibility has been firmly and
to deepen and consolidate the reforms at the level
thoroughly established, it relates ‘award types’ in the
of individual institutions. We may follow the source
Irish framework to the Bologna cycle descriptors. It
of this challenge further into the heart of the higher
is another matter entirely to assert that all individual
education system, where we encounter the issue of
Irish awards, and their related programmes, are
how to achieve real implementation of the learning
accurately aligned to the generic types for which
outcomes approach at the level of the discipline
compatibility has been established. Strategies to
or programme. This is not a matter of arranging a
address this issue may require action in several areas:
systemic commitment: it involves devising ways of
in relation to award and programme design; in relation
supporting higher education practitioners to work out
to quality assurance procedures; and, at the systemic
how to accommodate learning outcomes in their areas
level, in relation to the development of a coherent
of practice. The FIN network has pioneered solutions
listing or repertoire of awards in the NFQ.
to this issue, having already supported groups of
practitioners to collaboratively develop tools for
designing programmes and awards for inclusion in the
outcomes-based NFQ and for designing appropriate
assessment procedures for use in this context. The
collaborative approach that underpins FIN, and
the techniques and procedures developed by the
network groups, provide models that could have wide
application internationally.
The Irish authorities have already identified as a
priority, for attention at both national and European
levels, the need to bring together the framework,
credit and quality assurance aspects of the reform
process. While each of these initiatives has its
own particular objectives and context, it is clearly
desirable that they should operate in a coherent
and complementary way so that they contribute
effectively to the overall Bologna agenda. In Ireland,
Finally, looking at both the Irish and European
this priority is evident in the strategy now under way
dimensions of the Bologna Process, it is now apt to
to amalgamate the functions of several agencies that
consider whether the apparatus that enabled the
have hitherto been responsible for various aspects of
development of the frameworks, and the adoption
the qualifications system: NQAI, FETAC, HETAC and
of the three-cycle degree system, is suitable for the
IUQB. At the European level, this concern is reflected
upcoming tasks arising out of the 2010 objectives.
in a current project in the European Commission that
Given the softer focus of these objectives, it may well
is seeking ways of enhancing the synergy between the
be difficult to generate action lines that will result in
now wide range of initiatives that are based on the
clear progress in a two-year plan-and action rotation.
learning outcomes concept – including FQEHEA, ECTS
Even with recent adaptations, is the rolling secretariat
and the ENQA standards and guidelines.
the most appropriate model to support the BFUG
In addressing any or all of these issues, and in the
ongoing implementation of the Bologna reforms
generally, it is necessary to address the question: How
fast can we move with the change agenda? Are the
timeframes and deadlines set by the Process realistic?
in the future? In the Irish context, the roles of key
organisations such as NQAI and HETAC are already
evolving and it is necessary to plan for the co-ordination
of a different range of tasks and put in place ways of
evaluating progress towards less tangible targets.
It is undoubtedly the case that the development
work undertaken in the first decade of Bologna has
been rapid and efficient. As the process now shifts
into the implementation phase, where it encounters
a vast range of stakeholders and institutions with
widely varying operating systems and approaches,
the rate of progress must surely be slower. A view
emerging from the Irish experience is that it is more
important to deliver real change, even if it takes longer
to achieve, than to accept quick compliance that is
not embedded properly in the practice of the higher
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
education community.
17
Appendix 1: List of ministerial meetings in the
Bologna Process, 1999-2010
The Sorbonne Declaration was signed, in 1998,
by the ministers of four countries – namely, France,
Germany, UK and Italy. The aim of the Declaration
was to create a common frame of reference within
the intended European Higher Education Area, where
mobility should be promoted both for students and
graduates, as well as for the teaching staff. Also, it was
meant to ensure the promotion of qualifications, with
regard to the job market.
The aims of the Sorbonne Declaration were confirmed
in 1999, through the Bologna Declaration, where
29 countries expressed their willingness to commit to
enhance the competitiveness of the European Higher
Education Area, emphasising the need to further the
independence and autonomy of all Higher Education
Institutions. All the provisions of the Bologna Declaration
were set as measures of a voluntary harmonisation
process, not as clauses of a binding contract.
As follow-up to the Bologna Declaration, Ministerial
Conferences have taken place every two years, the
ministers expressing their will through the respective
Communiqués.
With the Prague Communiqué, in 2001, the number
of member countries was enlarged to 33, and there
was also an expansion of the objectives, in terms of
lifelong learning, involving students as active partners
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
and enhancing the attractiveness and competitiveness
18
of the European Higher Education Area. The
participating ministers committed themselves to
ensure the further development of quality assurance
and the development of national qualification
frameworks. The topic of social dimension was first
introduced in the Prague Communiqué.
Following the Ministerial Conference in Berlin, in
2003, the Berlin Communiqué enlarged the number
of countries to 40 members. The main provisions
of this Communiqué dealt with an expansion of
the objectives, as well as the promotion of quality
assurance. Another important aspect of the Berlin
Communiqué is that it referred to establishing the
follow-up structures supporting the process: the
Bologna Follow-up Group, the Board and the Bologna
Secretariat. With this Communiqué the Ministers also
agreed that there should be created a national followup structure in each of the participating countries.
The Bergen Communiqué, of 2005, marked a shift
from future plans to practical implementation; in
particular it was marked by
• the adoption of an overarching framework of
qualifications for the European Higher Education
Area and with a commitment to elaborating
national qualifications frameworks by 2010 – as well
as to having launched work by 2007;
• the adoption of guidelines and standards for quality
assurance and the request that ENQA, the EUA,
EURASHE and ESIB elaborate further proposals
concerning the suggested register of quality
assurance agencies;
• the further stress on the importance of the social
dimension of higher education;
• the necessity of improving interaction between the
European Higher Education Area and other parts of
the world (the “external dimension”);
• the growing importance of addressing the
development of the European Higher Education
Area beyond 2010.
In the London Communiqué, of 2007, the number
of participating countries was enlarged to 46. This
Communiqué focused on evaluating the progress
achieved by that time, concerning mobility, degree
structure, recognition, qualifications frameworks
(both overarching and national), lifelong learning,
quality assurance, social dimension, and also set
the priorities for 2009, these being, mainly, mobility,
social dimension, which was defined here for the
first time, data collection, employability, EHEA in
a global context and stock taking. For 2010 and
beyond, it was stressed that there is the need for
further collaboration, seeing it as an opportunity to
reformulate the visions and values.
In the Leuven/Louvain-la-Neuve Communiqué,
The following Ministerial Conference took place only
of 2009, the main working areas for the next decade
one year after the aforementioned, in March 2010.
were set, with emphasis on: social dimension, lifelong
It took place in Budapest-Vienna and it was an
learning, employability, student centred learning and the
Anniversary Conference, celebrating a decade of
teaching mission of education, international openness,
the Bologna Process. On this occasion, the European
mobility, education, research & innovation, as well as
Higher Education Area was officially launched, so
data collection, funding of the HE and multidimensional
that, in terms of a common European framework for
transparency tools. These main working areas show a
higher education, the objective set in the Bologna
new orientation of the Bologna Process, towards a more
Declaration was accomplished.
in-depth reform approach, thus ensuring the completion
of the Bologna Process implementation.
Appendix 2: Correspondences established
between the FQEHEA cycles and the NFQ and EQF Levels
FQEHEA
(Bologna)
EQF
10
Third Cycle
8
9
Second Cycle
7
8
First Cycle
6
7
First Cycle
6
6
Short cycle within the First Cycle
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
1
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
Irish
NFQ
19
Appendix 3: Explanation of acronyms
used in this report
BFUG
Bologna Follow-up Group
FIN
Framework Implementation Network
CEPES
European Centre for Higher Education/
FQEHEA
Framework for Qualifications of the
CHIU
Centre européen pour l’enseignement
European Higher Education Area supérieur (UNESCO)
(the ‘Bologna’ framework)
Conference of Heads of Irish Universities
(now Irish Universities Association)
HEA
Higher Education Authority
HET
higher education and training
HETAC
Higher Education and Training Awards
DIT
Dublin Institute of Technology
ECTS
European Credit Transfer System
ECVET
European Credit System for VET
IHEQN
Irish Higher Education Quality Network
EHEA
European Higher Education Area
IoT
Institute of Technology
NARIC
the Qualifications Recognition IUA
Irish Universities Association
IUQB
Irish Universities Quality Board
Assurance in Higher Education
JQI
Joint Quality Initiative
European Quality Assurance Register NFQ
National Framework of Qualifications
– Ireland service
ENQA
EQAR
European Association for Quality
Council
(Ireland)
Taking Stock: ten years of the Bologna Process in Ireland
for Higher Education
20
EQAVET
European Quality Assurance in VET
EQF
European Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning
ESIB
NQAI
of Ireland
QA-EHEA
ESU
European Students Union
EUA
European University Association
EURASHE
European Association of Institutions in Higher Education
FET
further education and training
FETAC
Further Education and Training Awards
Council
Standards and Guidelines for Quality
Assurance in the European Higher
European Students Information Bureau
(now ESU, European Students Union)
The National Qualifications Authority Education Area
TUNING
Tuning Educational Structures in Europe
UNESCO
United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organisation
USI
Union of Students in Ireland
VET
Vocational education and training