presentation of preliminary results of the tuning project le:notre workshop kassel presenter terry...

PRESENTATION OF PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF THE TUNING PROJECT

LE:NOTRE Workshop Kassel

Presenter

Terry Mitchell (University of Dortmund)

e-mail: [email protected]

WELCOME TO THE

• Background: European Blue• Tuning fork – tuning structures• University – Universal – Union• Open-ended, co-ordinated, flexible U

• Diverse, multi-coloured, dynamic

The Tuning Logo

TUNING MOTTO

Tuning of educational structures and programmes on the basis of diversity and autonomy

A project carried out by and for universities

An open call:

universities respond to the Bologna challenge

WHY TUNING?

To implement the Bologna - Prague - Berlin process at university level

To find ways to implement two cyclesTo identify common reference points from

discipline and university perspective

Tuning seeks to:

“Tune” educational structures in Europe Open up a debate Identify and exchange information Improve European co-operation and collaboration

in the development of quality, effectiveness and transparency

Tuning does not seek to:

develop any sort of unified, prescriptive, or definitive European curricula

create any rigid set of subject specifications restrict or direct educational content end the rich diversity of European higher

education restrict independence of academics and subject

specialists damage local and national autonomy

Conclusions

Universities have taken their full responsibility in the Bologna process by initiating the Tuning project

Tuning shows that groups of academic experts working in a European context can establish reference points for the two cycles in their subject areas

Common reference points can be identified using an approach based on subject related and generic competences

The application of Tuning techniques can be vital for the creation of the European higher education area

A process of adjusting to Bologna indications is under way: Tuning gives a co-ordinated context for collaboration

Recommendations

European higher education institutions should agree on a common terminology and develop a set of methodologies for convergence at the disciplinary and interdisciplinary level

Competences (both subject-related and generic) should be central when designing educational programmes.

A framework based on a common understanding of the European credit system should be adopted.

A common approach to the length of studies within the Bologna two-cycle system is essential

The results of Tuning should be discussed broadly and if possible elaborated and extended by all stakeholders

Action lines

Line 1Academic and generic competences

Line 2Subject specific competences (knowledge and

skills) Line 3

ECTS as a credit accumulation system Line 4

Approaches to teaching, learning and assessment

Why Line 1? Why Focus on

competences?

1. A learner oriented approach to education

2. The need for quality and enhancement of employability and citizenship

3. The creation of the European Higher Education Area

Methodology and Results

Cluster sampling:University 1

Respondents

University 2

Respondents

University 3

Respondents

University 100

Respondents

University 101

Respondents

...

...

Procedure of sample selection

- Graduates- Employers- Academics

RESPONDENTS

FINAL SAMPLE

7 Areas & 101 university depart. & 16 Countries Business Geology History Mathematics Physics Education ChemistryTotal number of respondents: 5183 Graduates 944 Employers 998 Academics

Data

Austria Belgium Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Iceland Ireland Italy Netherlands Norway Portugal Spain Sweden United Kingdon

ResultsComparing Graduates and Employers

RankingImportance

ofCompetences

Graduates Employers

1st2nd

...

Ranking

1st2nd

...

Ranking

Highly correlated rankings(Spearman correlation = 0.89)

1st2nd

...

Combined Ranking

Graduates&Employers


Graduates Employers

1st2nd

...

1st2nd

...

Ranking Ranking

Highly correlated rankings(Spearman correlation = 0.89)

RankingImportance

ofCompetences

Combin

ed ra

nking

: Firs

t ten c

ompe

tence

s

2Capacity for applying knowledge in practice

InstrumentalInterpersonalSystemic

33

Capacity to adapt to new situations

Concern for quality

44

Information management skills

Ability to work autonomously


11

1

Capacity for analysis and synthesis

Capacity to learn

Problem solving

5Teamwork

6 Capacity for organisation and planning

Combin

ed ra

nking

: Las

t three

compe

tence

s


InstrumentalInterpersonalSystemic

18 Understanding of cultures andcustoms of other countries

Appreciation of diversityand multiculturality

17

16 Ability to work inan international

context


Howimportant

is...

Ethical commitmentAbility to work in interdisciplinary teamInitiative and entrepreneurial spiritTeamwork

Ability to work autonomouslyElementary computing skillsResearch skillsCapacity for organisation and planning

Higher foremployers

Higher forgraduates

ResultsAcademics

Ran

king

Com

pete

nces

Graduates Employers

1st2nd

...

1st2nd

...

Ranking Ranking

Academics

1st2nd

...

Ranking

The Academics ranking is not as similar to Employers and Graduates as it was between Graduates and Employers

MOST RELEVANT DIFFERENCES

Correlation 0.46 Correlation 0.54

ResultsAcademics

Ran

king

Com

pete

nces

Graduates EmployersAcademicsRankingRankingRanking

1st. Basic General Knowledge

4th. Computing Skills

16th. Computing Skills

14th. Interpersonal Skills

12th. Basic General Knowledge

12th. Basic General Knowledge



Results

Respondent Institution Country

Multilevel modelling

How different are countries?What is the effect of country level?

?

COUNTRY EFFECT: GRADUATES, IMPORTANCE ITEMS

Results: Country effect

Will to succeedAbility to work autonomouslyKnowledge of a second language

Capacity for applying knowledge in practiceConcern for qualityInitiative and entrepreneurial spiritAbility to work in an interdisciplinary team

30 items

REMAINING 23 ITEMS

STRONG

MILD&

NO EFFECT

Line 2:

Subject Related Competences

Line 2: Subject Related Competences -Introduction

Development of the subject area work groups Phase 1: Informing Phase 2: Storming Phase 3: Norming Phase 4: Performing

Cross-fertilisation Other subject area groups synergy groups plenary sessions ......from the platforms of academics from EU MS

The Chemistry Eurobachelor Framework

The proposal deals with the following aspects:

Outcomes Subject KnowledgeAbilities and Skills

Content Credit Distribution ECTS and Student Workload Methods of Teaching and Learning Assessment Procedures and Performance Criteria Grading Diploma Supplement

The decoupling point inchemistry programmes

Input First Cycle NeedsSecond

Cycle

Wide knowledge and skills basis

Defined core outcomes

”Eurobachelor” framework

SpecialisationHeavy emphasis on researchStructure very flexibleLittle necessity for defining ”common ground”

decoupling point

Academics’ perception of subjectimportance at first and second cycle

Line 2: Subject Related Competences -General Conclusions

Obviously there is a great willingness and openness of academics to

exchange their views on subject related competences and skills within their subject area

a significant common line of understanding an identifiable common anxiety as regards external

pressure to harmonise contents of subject areas a clear orientation from subject input towards learning

outcomes in the design of study-programmes an identifiable acceptance of the need of a quality

assurance system

Line 2: Subject Related Competences -Specific Conclusions

Diversity between the groups Common framework appears to be acceptable as

regards first-cycle programmes. Identification ofa common core (Mathematics, Business)a common study programme (Chemistry,

Physics, Business)subject areas which appear to be different

but are in fact very similar (Education, Physics)

learning outcomes (Geology, History)


A common framework in second-cycle programmes appears to be counter-productive

This does not excludeformation of partnerships or strategic alliances

as at first cycle level


Within the disciplines subjects can be clustered knowledge acquisition and widening knowledge acquisition and deepening knowledge opening and transfer (support,

organisation and communication and transfer skills and competences)

TUNING has emphasised the latter: Without it knowledge acquisition is useless.


By focusing on the output (learning outcomes) the necessary road map has to be identified

(syllabus) and the requirements specified for those who want to

enter the programme (input) And linking this to ECTS, mobility and access

across borders, in local, regional and international terms and in the sense of lifelong-learning become a reality


TUNING proved that clear objectives in education can be achieved

within a limited period of time if an adequate platform is installed

such platforms at European level are a critical success factor in giving academics the opportunity to exchange views discuss upcoming issues constantly update what is common, diverse and dynamic


Only by relating knowledge and subject related competences to profiles of academic degrees and to those of professions can transparency be created and coherence identified across Europe

Line 3ECTS as an Accumulation System

Two perspectives on a credit accumulation (and transfer) system:

• Macro: the principles• Micro: in practice (structures,

learning outcomes, workload)

PRINCIPLES PAPER Pan European Credit Accumulation Framework- Good Practice Guidelines -

INTRODUCTION – Rationale (paradigm shift)

AIMS – What it must achieve

NATURE – A multi purpose framework

CREDITS – What are they?

CREDITS AND LEVELS – The significance of

levels

CREDITS AND QUALITY ASSURANCE – Links

CONCLUSIONS ….

‘An effective pan-European credit accumulation and transfer system requires a set of common principles and approaches to credits.’

‘The more details that are provided about the nature, context and level of credits, the more useful they become as a common currency for educational recognition, and as a vital element in the creation of the European Higher Education Area.’

• Educational Structures• Learning outcomes / competences• A European Credit Accumulation and Transfer System• Workload

LINE 3:THE MICRO PERSPECTIVE:

ECTS as an Accumulation System

EDUCATIONAL STRUCTURES

Objective: Comparison in Higher Education

Requires comparability in: systems structures content of studies

Tools to accommodate the objective: definition of learning outcomes / competences a credit transfer and accumulation system


PARTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

National Authorities: Higher Educational Systems

Universities: Higher Educational Structures

Faculties/Departments: Content of Studies

Accreditation

Quality Assur. and Assessm.

TUNING


EDUCATIONAL STRUCTURES

Objective: Comparison in Higher Education Possible obstacles:

differences in the regular teaching and learning periods (including examination periods) per academic year in Europe

differences in structures and recognised degrees / qualification in a European setting

differences in the length of higher education studies to be unbridgeable or incomparable: first cycle degree: 180 to 240 credits (range 3 to 4) second cycle degree: 90 to 120 credits (range 1.5 to 2)


LEARNING OUTCOMES / COMPETENCES

Comparability and competitiveness requires transparent learning outcomes / competences (besides a credit system)

Credits as such are an insufficient indication for the (level of) learning achievements

The definition of learning outcomes / competences is a responsibility of the academic staff

On the basis of defined learning outcomes, credits are an important tool for designing curricula

Different pathways can lead to comparable learning outcomes, which allows the diversity in Europe to be fully maintained

Credit accumulation and transfer is facilitated by clearly defined learning outcomes


A EUROPEAN CREDIT ACCUMULATION AND TRANSFER SYSTEM

European higher education requires one credit system: ECTS A Europe-wide accumulation and transfer system is an essential

tool for more flexible kinds of higher education: part-time studies, lifelong learning

As part of ECTS it is necessary to develop a system of level indicators and course type descriptors

In an officially accepted transfer and accumulation system credits no longer have relative value but they have absolute value


A EUROPEAN CREDIT ACCUMULATION AND TRANSFER SYSTEM

CREDITS 60 ECTS credits measures the workload of a typical student

during one academic year (nine months) A full calendar year programme (12 months programme of

teaching, learning and examinations) can have a maximum load of 75 credits (which equals 46-50 weeks)

Credits allow calculation of the necessary workload and impose a realistic limit on what is possible in a programme or course.

Credits are not interchangeable automatically from one context to another.

ECTS as an Accumulation SystemECTS AND WORKLOAD

Calculation of workload in terms of credits is to a large extent discipline related, and is determined always by academic staff

Workload and notional learning time are closely related The notional learning time of a student is influenced by many elements,

such as: diversity of traditions curriculum design and context coherence of the curriculum teaching and learning methods methods of assessment and performance organisation of teaching ability and diligence of the student financial support from public and private funds

Websiteswww.relint.deusto.es/TuningProject/index.htm

www.let.rug.nl/TuningProject/index.htm

presentation of preliminary results of the tuning project le:notre workshop kassel presenter terry...

Documents