Tuning educational structures in Europe
summary

B. Aims and objectives 
B.1. Explain the rationale of and background to the project 

The project Tuning educational structures in Europe is intended as a two years Pilot Project. During this period five Pilot Groups should built up knowledge and gather experiences which will have a direct effect on the development and implementation of educational reforms regarding all higher education institutions in Europe.  The Pilot Groups should therefore be representative for university studies and their methodologies in general. For this purpose the following disciplines have been selected: Mathematics, Geology, Business, History and Education Sciences. 
At present two important developments take place, which should be strongly related to each other. On the one hand a common European labour market is developing as a direct result of the introduction of one currency in the majority of EU countries and the implementation of one customs zone as the result of the Schengen agreement. This will lead to a growing mobility of the labouring force. Employees will not only compete with fellow countrymen in finding jobs in the future, but will also compete with those in other European countries. The growing numbers of multi-nationals have already stimulated this process. However, on the other hand there are the institutions that educate people for that labour market. This labour market is not only changing in size but also in content. Due to the fast technical developments, especially in the information and communication sector, continuous education has become a part of everyday live. This, as a result, stimulates Life Long Learning. The higher institutions are trying to cope with these challenging developments, but have not been able to find the right answers yet. 
The discussion in the Higher Education sector takes place on a number of levels. Nearly all the European countries are discussing reforming their educational systems at present. This revision of systems is the common responsibility of the national governments and Higher Educational institutions in general. At the same time intensive debates take place in many institutions about reforming the educational structures and the ways teaching is organised and offered. The experiences, which have been gained in the different EU mobility programmes, seem to play an important role in this process. Although the international perspective plays its part, the actual exchange of opinions between foreign institutions seems not really to taken place. This is in contradiction with what should be the situation given the topic.  
The following overview can be offered regarding the present developments in a number of European countries: 
In Germany, the federal state has launched a programme to support financially the introduction of Bachelor and Master degree programmes. In Italy, several structural reforms have been implemented; including the adoption of a system essentially based on two main cycles, undergraduate and graduate. It is emphasised that the first cycle degree should also be a relevant to the European labour market as an appropriate level of qualification. In the Netherlands, there has been an intense debate about the structure of higher education since May 1999. In spring 2000 the Ministry of Education set up a national committee to advise on issues including the proposed introduction of a two-cycle system, the desired length of the second cycle (one or two years), the financing of Master programmes, and responsibility for the financing of scholarships. The report from this committee states that a two-cycle system should be introduced as soon as possible. However, the appropriate length of the second cycle has not yet been settled, nor has the issue of funding. The discussion about the reform of higher education in Belgium has just started. In the Flemish speaking part a commission has been established to study the effects of the introduction of a Bachelors-Masters system. In the French speaking part the discussion has been initiated at the Rectors Conference level. In the last seven years the higher education structure of Spain has undergone a period of reform. At present discussion is under way on the length and nature of each of the two cycles of study, and a series of study curricula are being prepared in order to put the reforms into practice. The debate is taking place in every country of the EU in different formats, but in essence is the same.

From this survey it can be learned that in many countries the educational systems will actually be reformed. This is the direct effect of the political decision to converge the different national systems in Europe. For Higher Education institutions these reforms mean the actual starting point for the other discussion: the adaptation of curricula in terms of structures and teaching. In this reform process the required professional profiles and needs of society should play an important role. But this is not sufficient. As important is the required level of education expressed in terms of competencies or learning outcomes.  
The phrasing of competencies or learning outcomes as a starting point for designing curricula is a rather new phenomenon. Only in the United Kingdom and to a lesser extend the Netherlands knowledge has been built up in this respect. However, in other countries it is becoming a central point of attention. It is very obvious that it would be a waste of time and money to re-invent the wheel in every country again and not to make use of the experiences and knowledge of universities in the other European countries. The proposed Pilot Project should deliver a platform for this debate. 
The first and main purpose of the Pilot Project should be, to tune the different educational structures in Europe and to build up experiences in a number of disciplines regarding commonly understood and accepted profiles and competencies. This has to be done in such a way that the results can be implemented in other fields as well. Furthermore, Open and Distance Learning and Life Long Learning should be facilitated by the outcome.
A basic factor in the whole process, which should not be underestimated, is that there is a commonly understood system how to measure workload. Here the crucial importance is shown of a European credit accumulation and transfer system. Besides discussing educational reforms, many Member States are also in the process of adopting or seriously discussing the adoption of the ECTS, either in place of existing national credit systems or as an entirely new credit system at national level. The fact that ECTS is not yet the common notion for designing study programmes complicates the development of generally accepted competencies or learning outcomes. It has to be stressed here, however, that the ECTS has never designed the tools or methodology how to measure workload.   
The situation at present is as follows: In the case of Italy, the ECTS has already been adopted by law as the official credit system. Ireland has also adopted 60 credits as the national reference point. In Spain, the difficulties created by the Spanish credit system (based on teaching hours instead of workload) have for the last year been discussed at several sectorial meetings of the Spanish Conference of Rectors, with a wide consensus that the national system should be replaced by ECTS. A law is being prepared in this regard. Recently, meetings have been held at the French Ministry of Education with a view to adopting a credit system, which would undoubtedly be ECTS. In the Netherlands, the idea of replacing the current 42-credit system with ECTS is under discussion by the Conference of Rectors, with wide support in the universities. Although Germany has never had a credit-based system in higher education, ECTS has become an essential part of university life since both the federal government and the governments of the various federal states have expressed their interest in reforming university structures and processes. It is always assumed that ECTS is the system referred to when credits are discussed. The German Conference of Rectors has even given an award to those universities most active in the use of ECTS. The Portuguese Conference of Rectors is also extremely active, and a decision about the introduction of ECTS as the national system is expected. The change to ECTS is regarded as simpler in systems based on student workload, with reference numbers of credits such as 40 (Sweden and Finland), 30 (Ireland), 20 (Norway) and 120 (UK). 
A second major task for the proposed Pilot Project is to reflect jointly on the key issues that are debated at country level. These issues include how to measure student workload, and how to relate this to learning outcomes including knowledge, skills and competencies. Open and Distance Learning and Life Long Learning should be taken into account here too. It is the right moment to bring together representatives from countries with different and longer experiences of credit systems based on student workload, and from countries adopting a credit system for the first time. It is also the moment at which it is vital to make available examples of good practice and to identify ways of evaluating programme objectives. 

B.2. Describe the main objectives of the project
The main objectives of the project can be summarised as follows:
•	To develop professional profiles and desired outcomes, in terms of knowledge, skills and competence in the five subject areas.
•	To facilitate transparency in the educational structures and to further innovation through communication of experience and identification of good practice.
•	To bring about a high level of Europe-wide convergence in Higher Education in five main subject areas: Mathematics, Geology, Business, History and Education Sciences* by defining commonly accepted professional profiles and learning outcomes of teaching.
•	To create five European networks that can present examples of good practice, encouraging innovation and quality in the joint reflection and exchange, also for other disciplines.
•	To develop and exchange information in relation to the development of curricula in these five areas, and develop a model curriculum structure for each area, enhancing the recognition and European integration of diplomas.
•	To build bridges between this network of universities and other appropriate qualified bodies in order to produce convergence in the five main subject areas.
•	To elaborate a methodology for analysing common elements and areas of specificity and diversity, and how to tune them.
•	To associate other subject areas where a similar process can be incorporated through synergy. These possible areas, where related projects are already underway, are Linguistics,   Humanitarian Development, Chemistry, Law and Physics.
•	To act in a co-ordinated manner with all the actors involved in the process of tuning of educational structures (Ministries, Conferences of Rectors, and Universities).

* These five disciplines have been selected, because they guarantee that most educational fields and their different methodologies are covered. For the follow-up of the results of this project this is crucial. Mathematics and Geology represent the natural sciences and the last also the Earth Sciences. History has been chosen because it can represent both the Arts and the Humanities. Business Administration stands for both Economics and Business. Finally, Education Sciences represents the Social Sciences and Teachers Training.    

C. Project outcomes
C.1 Describe the anticipated outcomes of the project
•	Five very active Networks of Universities. The 70 or so universities will be selected in the following manner:
a)	There will be one university per country in each of the networks; there is no possibility of double participation by any university.
b)	These universities will be selected after consultation with each of the National ECTS Counsellors, based on the following criteria:
•	Recognised experience and dynamism in European co-operation
•	Excellence in the particular subject area concerned 
•	A record of good practice in the use of ECTS

•	A methodology to move forward in Europe-wide tuning of educational structures in these particular fields, which can in the future be applied to other areas.
•	A set of general and more specific competencies or learning outcomes of teaching of the five selected disciplines, which are also very useful in a wider perspective
•	Identification of the major obstacles in the process of convergence at the level of structures and possible ways forward
•	A common methodology for measuring student workload at European level in relation to professional profiles and learning outcomes including knowledge, competence and skills 
•	A platform for discussion with professional bodies on these issues 
•	A final report giving the experience of five subject areas, in their efforts to tune and converge European educational structures 
•	A set of recommendations to be offered to the Conference of Rectors, European Ministries and the European Commission

C.2. State in detail why you think the project should be undertaken, stressing the added value for Europe and illustrating clearly how the principle of subsidiary is respected

As was described in part B.1 above, this project addresses itself to a crucial need present at European level. The level of co-operation among European universities has reached a very high level in actions related to student mobility and networking, and to a certain extent in the development of joint programmes, particularly at Master’s and Doctoral levels. However, during the last year, a more profound discussion has been initiated, affecting not only student mobility, but also the whole of higher educational structures in the European universities. Many meetings are being held at the European universities about the processes of accreditation, quality, modularization, and harmonisation.

It is important, first, that the debate takes place at different levels, but also that it have European settings where experiences can be discussed jointly from the outset, rather than being debated after each national group has already defined its interests and may be at risk of entrenching behind them. This project responds to the philosophy of finding means of dialogue right from the start and all along the way, rather than from finished products. 

In the present situation of change, reform and the search for methods of convergence, in terms of commonly accepted professional profiles and competencies, this project could make a very significant contribution. 

C.3. Indicate who will benefit most from the project
This project aims to offer an example to walking the road to define commonly accepted professional profiles and competencies in concrete areas. This will have wide-ranging benefits for a diversity of groups within Europe, particularly institutions of Higher Education in the five main subject areas and members of the networks in the five synergy areas, as well as the Ministries of Education and Conferences of Rectors. Indirectly, it will benefit all European institutions of Higher Education through the tuning of European educational structures and teaching. Furthermore, the European economy will benefit through improved mobility of labour. 

C.4. Describe how you intend to disseminate the results of the project
The results of the project will be disseminated to six target audiences: 
-	the 70 participating universities; 
-	the members of the five networks in the synergy areas; 
-	the Conferences of Rectors; 
-	the Ministries of Education; 
-	the professional bodies of the five main subject areas; 
-	and, via Internet, all interested parties such as other institutions of higher education within and outside Europe.

Project responsible: 
Robert Wagenaar  
Secretaris van de Faculteit der Letteren  
Rijksuniversiteit Groningen  
Oude Kijk in 't Jatstraat 26   
Postbus 716  
NL-9700 AS Groningen  
Fax: 31 50 3637253  

For any further information, please contact the  Management Committee:
Robert Wagenaar: tel. +31 50 363 5176 -: r.wagenaar@let.rug.nl
Julia Mª González Ferreras: tel. +34 94 4139068 - iprieto@relint.deusto.es