Two discourses: Researchers and policy-making in higher education

The theme of this article focuses on how policy discourse and research discourse meet in contract research in higher education. The interplay of these discourses has consequences for researchers who have to balance conflicting demands, which we view as links between research and policy cycles. Two evaluation studies on the introduction and effects of new policy instruments are discussed, focusing on the interaction between policy needs, and research design. The examples are taken from policies in the development towards increasing self-regulation in higher education, of which Finland and the Netherlands are interesting examples in the European context

A Next Generation of Quality Assurance Models : On Phases, Levels and Circles in Policy Development

Quality assessment has been part of the feedback mechanisms of European higher education systems since around 1980. Due to internal dynamics, `erosion¿ of the effectiveness of firstgeneration quality assessment systems has led to loss of credibility (legitimacy) of these systems in the late 1990s. External dynamics also necessitate designing a next generation of quality assurance systems. They include notably a loss of transparency (hence, legitimacy) of the European higher education system through increased internationalisation (most notably through the Bologna process) which puts new, increased demands on institutional arrangements for quality assurance. In this paper, we first intend to schematise the developments of quality assurance in higher education by introducing a phase model of the effects of internal and external dynamics. Next, we will analyse this phase model from the perspective of argumentative policy inquiry. Finally, we will contrast policy developments in higher education with one other example, viz. environmental policy in the Netherlands. The conclusions of this comparison, as well as the new challenges set for quality assurance in higher education by the Bologna process, are the subject matter for the final section of our paper

Excellence in European Higher Education: Bologna and Beyond

This paper explores the role of quality and quality assurance in European higher education, both in the current Bologna process and in the further future. The tension between striving for excellence and achieving adequate, threshold levels of quality, is a major theme. It describes accreditation as a major form of quality assurance, spreading because of the Bologna process in Europe. Then, major policy developments up to the European Standards and Guidelines are sketched. A discussion follows of limitations quality assurance encounters in further fostering European harmonisation of higher education and of some other instruments (e.g. rankings). Finally, some major influences on the future European higher education landscape are sketched, leading to the conclusion that notwithstanding the advent of the European Higher Education Area (EHEA), intra-European differences will remain important

Ex oriente lux? Akredytacja w Europie po zburzeniu muru berlińskiego i podpisaniu Deklaracji Bolońskiej - charakter narodowy i różnorodność systemów

Transparency in higher education is one of the aims of the Bologna Declaration (1999). In a number of countries in Europe this led to processes to change quality assurance into accreditation, which supposedly results in more transparency. Are these lessons to be learnt from experiences and Central and Eastern Europe regarding accreditation since 1990? The author maintains that the character of those “first generation" accreditation systems is more exclusively academic and drives towards uniformity more than the multifaceted systems needed for Bologna’s “second generation” requirements. A “multiple accreditation system” would answer these requirements better. Some principles of a multiple accreditation systems are presented, together with consequences of external evaluation criteria and procedures. Two nascent accreditation systems designs in Western European countries (Germany and the Netherlands) are then compared with the demands set by the Bologna Declaration and with the design principles of a multiple accreditation system. The main conclusion is that although some steps towards an open and flexible accreditation system are set, at the present stage of their development it seems that maintaining national control in these two cases has more priority than achieving Europeanwide transparency.Jednym z celów Deklaracji Bolońskiej,  podpisanej w 1999 roku, jest osiągnięcie przejrzystości systemów szkolnictwa wyższego. W wielu państwach europejskich metody zapewniania jakości kształcenia zaczęto zastępować procesem akredytacji. Zakładano, iż wynikiem tych działań będzie właśnie większa przejrzystość. Czy można skorzystać z doświadczeń państw Europy Środkowej i Wschodniej zdobytych po 1990 roku i odnoszących się do akredytacji? Autor utrzymuje, iż systemy akredytacyjne „pierwszej generacji” miały niemal wyłącznie charakter akademicki i celem ich było w większym stopniu ujednolicanie niż tworzenie różnorodnych systemów. W świetle dokumentu przyjętego w Bolonii systemy akredytacyjne „drugiej generacji” mają zapewnić większą różnorodność. W artykule ukazane są niektóre zasady zróżnicowanego systemu akredytacji, a także ich wpływ na kryteria i procedury oceny zewnętrznej. Następnie autor dokonuje porównania dwóch rodzących się modeli systemów akredytacyjnych w krajach Europy Zachodniej (Niemczech i Holandii) z wymaganiami określonymi w Deklaracji Bolońskiej  oraz z zasadami zróżnicowanego systemu akredytacji. Na podstawie tego porównania formułuje wniosek, iż - mimo podjęcia już pewnych kroków w kierunku stworzenia otwartego i elastycznego systemu akredytacji - można odnieść wrażenie, że w dwóch wymienionych przypadkach utrzymanie kontroli na poziomie krajowym jest ważniejsze niż osiągnięcie przejrzystości w szerokim wymiarze europejskim

Involvement of stakeholders in internal quality assurance across Europe. East-west contrasts in a seven-country study

This paper reports on a cross-national comparative study into quality assurance in higher education, which was meant to uncover drivers and barriers to European harmonisation experienced by higher education institutions. The research on which this contribution is based was undertaken in the context of the project ‘Identifying barriers in promoting the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance at institutional level’ (IBAR). The study starts from the instrument in the Bologna Process to increase compatibility of quality assurance in all, by now 47, countries in the EHEA. Our analysis focuses less on the formal quality assurance processes that happen once every five or more years, and more on the continuing internal arrangements that influence the quality of education on a daily basis. We can conclude that in three of the Central European countries involved in this study, state and regional public authorities were seen as important stakeholders, and this somewhat étatist approach contrasts with the more prominent and direct influence of private sector representatives in the Western European country case

Students as stakeholders in quality assurance in eight European countries

How are stakeholders represented in higher education institutions’ decision-making bodies that influence the quality of education, and are their viewpoints taken into account? This paper addresses this question taking into account the empirical evidence from eight countries in Europe. Findings indicate that formal barriers are largely absent, that stakeholder influence has grown somewhat over recent years, but that actual influence of stakeholders can be further optimised in higher education institutions

The self-concept of Ukrainian doctoral students:Means-ends decoupling at the state level

Employing the Twenty Statements Test and a framework of self-motives (self-esteem, self-efficacy, authenticity), this paper examines the self-concept of Ukrainian doctoral students while means-ends decoupling takes place at the state level. The latter implies that the practices of state policies are disconnected from the state's core goal of creating public welfare. Data are taken from a survey of 125 doctoral students at one Ukrainian university and supplemented with 30 personal interviews within the sample of respondents. The findings reveal that in the Ukrainian case, means-ends decoupling at the state level causes institutional complexity, which results in means-ends decoupling at the organisational level, which in turn leads to cultural complexity. Institutional and cultural complexities experienced by doctoral students trigger them to sustain means-ends decoupling at the individual level. The main decoupling for most Ukrainian PhD students is that doctoral education neither increases their employability nor contributes to the development of science, economy or society. Means-ends decoupling at all levels results not only in a severe diversion of financial and human capital but also has a negative impact on individuals' well-being, hindering their personal and professional development and evoking a sense of meaning-lessness, alienation and cognitive dissonance