Doctoral studies in Bologna Process. Structure Training of young researchers in the documents of...
-
Upload
bryan-faulkner -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
2
Transcript of Doctoral studies in Bologna Process. Structure Training of young researchers in the documents of...
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 - 2003(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 knowledgeResearch as an integral part of higher education
Berlin Communiqué (2003)Research – integral part of EHE
I cycle3-4 years180-240 ECTS
II cycle1.5-2 years
90-120 ECTSLong cycle5-6 years300-360ECTS
Postgraduate cycle
e.g. lowmedicine
I + II =300 ECTS
III cycle3-4 yearsECTS ??
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 EducationInstitutions 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 CycleBachelor
II cycleMaster
III CycleDoctor
Research
III CycleDoctor
European Research Area
ERA(Research and
Innovation Area)
ERA
EHEAEducation 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 2020 - The European Higher Education Area in the new decade
Education, research and innovation15. 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 Europe’s 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 Europe’s 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 researcher’s 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 levelof state; institution ?
What is better ?
conflict
Excellence as the distinctive trait of doctoral training
Models of supervision
IndividualMultiply (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 andresponsibilities of a supervisor
modelsof supervision
formalarrangements
selection of a supervisor
training of supervisorsqualification
requirements for a supervisor
conflict resolution
SUPERVISIONMONITORING
&ASSESSMENT
source: A. Krasniewski, EUA Conf. on Doctoral Programmes in Europe, Nice, Dec. 2006
Excellence as the distinctive trait of doctoral training
SUPERVISOR
Qualificationrequirements
Role and responsibilities
source: A. Krasniewski, EUA Conf. on Doctoral Programmes in Europe, Nice, Dec. 2006
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)?