In search of a comparative advantage

Reforming the structure of higher education in Europe should make it easier to compare degrees awarded in different countries, but things are rarely that simple, as a European Voice debate on the issue heard last month.

Not only does comparability depend on how the reforms are carried out, but also on the amount and quality of the information people have to make a comparison.

The fundamental change brought in by the Bologna higher education reforms is to organise degrees into three cycles: the bachelor degree, typically lasting three or four years; the master degree, one or two years; and the doctorate, three years. While this is a major change for many countries, it neither harmonises degree content nor grants recognition for degrees across borders. This level of harmonisation in EU higher education only exists in selected medical disciplines and architecture.

"The only thing we are doing is making degrees more understandable," explained Peter Van der Hijden, who co-ordinates the European Commission’s contribution to the Bologna process from the education department. "The most that you can achieve is that outcomes become more readable."

Even that may not be achieved by the simple transition to the three cycles, which a recent survey from the European University Association revealed is reaching completion. Some 82% of European institutions surveyed reported that the three cycles were in place, a dramatic increase on the 53% reported in 2003.

The EUA’s Karin Riegler explained during the debate that the aim was for university curricula to be reformed so that a coherent three-cycle system could be established, with measurable outcomes at each stage. However, in some countries the change has been made by simply dividing longer degrees, or squeezing long degrees into fewer years. This achieves the desired structure, but not the comparability.

Just how a potential employer or university admissions tutor ‘reads’ a degree will depend on the other information that is at his or her disposal. The Bologna process is addressing this with confidence-building initiatives such as a quality assurance framework and systems of credits and certificates that explain what a degree represents and its national background in a standardised way. Van der Hijden warned that there is much more inform-ation on the way, particularly concerning national systems of higher education, disciplines and even individual universities.

However, even well-researched information may contribute to subjective perceptions of national systems, as a report from the Higher Education Policy Institute in London warned at the end of September. In examining the experience of students in English universities, it found that they spent significantly less time each week studying than their mainland counterparts.

"Although there is no suggestion here that the length of study equates to quality of learning, as these comparisons become better known there is bound to be increasing pressure on English universities to explain how their shorter, less intensive, courses match those elsewhere in Europe," the report’s authors note.

With fees much higher in England than in most other countries, the report also found that many international students believe that they receive poor value for money in English institutions. "These are potentially very serious findings," the report warns. Clearly a more comparable system of degrees in Europe will be a threat to some universities as well as a benefit.

• Ian Mundell is a freelance journalist based in Brussels.

Reforming the structure of higher education in Europe should make it easier to compare degrees awarded in different countries, but things are rarely that simple, as a European Voice debate on the issue heard last month.

• Primary Source