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


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


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)


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


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


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


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


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)


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


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


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


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


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?


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)?

doctoral studies in bologna process. structure training of young researchers in the documents of...

Documents

doctoral studies

structural doctoral

doctoral training source

research training increase

importance of research

research based training

research integral

relevance of research