Tuning Educational Structures in Europe: Background: Introduction
The Management Committee, Tuning Educational Structures in Europe Project:Tuning Project Objectives and Outcomes

Tuning Educational Structures in Europe: Background

Introduction

The project Tuning Educational Structures in Europe was submitted to the European Commission at the end of 2000. It was intended as a two-year pilot project jointly coordinated by the University of Deusto in Bilbao, Spain and the University of Groningen in the Netherlands. The project was launched on 4 May 2001.

This closing conference marks an important step at which initial conclusions are presented to responsible actors. Further discussion and work are still needed and are underway. Nevertheless this conference serves to initiate the final phase of the project, which will involve a debate which is more focussed in terms and broader in scope.

The Tuning project began and developed in the wider context of constant reflection within higher education, demanded by the rapid pace of change in society. But the project is particularly marked by the context of the Bologna-Prague-Berlin process, which has provoked intent debate on the nature of educational structures. This debate is happening all across Europe, at institutional and national level. Tuning aimed to offer a platform for these debates to take place at a European level in the context of higher education.

The Tuning project sought to:

• "Tune" educational structures in Europe, and thereby aid the development of the European Higher Education Area.
• Open up a debate on the nature and importance of subject-specific and general competences, involving all stakeholders, including academics, graduates and employers;
• Identify and exchange information on common subject-based reference points, curricula content, learning outcomes and methods of teaching, learning and assessment;
• Improve European co-operation and collaboration in the development of the quality, effectiveness and transparency of European higher education by examining ECTS credits and other suitable devices to enhance progress.

It did not seek to develop any sort of unified, prescriptive, or definitive European curricula; to create any rigid set of subject specifications designed to restrict or direct the content, delivery or nature of European higher education; nor to end the rich diversity of European education, restrict the independence of academics and subject specialists, or damage local and national academic autonomy.

The creation of a European Higher Education Area was clearly implied in the objectives of Tuning. The changes that are occurring are an opportunity to further enhance quality in European university education.

The Pilot project aimed to enable European universities to make a joint reflection and debate on these issues, enabling comparative analysis, building upon their experience and conferring a European dimension to the undertaking. The project used a discipline-based approach to arrive at understanding and consensus about the nature of degrees and in particular the issue of 1st and 2nd cycles. There were seven Pilot groups, together representative of university studies and methodologies in general, in the areas of Business, Educational Sciences, Geology, History, Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry. In addition, certain other disciplines contributed to the Tuning project as synergy areas: Languages, Engineering, Humanitarian Development, Medical Sciences, Law and Veterinary Sciences.

Tuning is a university-led project. It presents the motivated and generous work of 128 academics from 105 University departments across the length and breadth of Europe (see map on p. 5). The work has been helped by formal consultation via questionnaires, to which a total of 7,125 people responded (comprising 5,183 graduates, 944 employers and 998 academics). This is not to mention the informal teamwork, reflection and debate provoked at the level of departments, disciplines and countries.

The final results of the Tuning Educational Structures in Europe project will be published towards the end of 2002. For now, this booklet presents some preliminary results and it is hoped that this final conference will lead to fruitful debate and discussion on the results, their implications and the future of higher education in Europe.

The Management Committee, Tuning Educational Structures in Europe Project

Tuning Project Objectives and Outcomes

Besides the Bologna, Prague, Berlin process, the project also needs to be seen in the context of the Salamanca convention of the European universities (March 2001), at which the European universities declared that:

"European higher education institutions recognise that their students need and demand qualifications which they can use effectively for the purpose of their studies and careers all over Europe. The institutions and their networks and organisations acknowledge their role and responsibility in this regard, and confirm their willingness to organise themselves accordingly within the framework of autonomy."

"Higher education institutions endorse the move towards a compatible qualification framework based on a main articulation in undergraduate and postgraduate studies."

The objectives outlined in the first Tuning Document and the progress that has been made towards them are discussed individually below.

1. To create five European discipline-based networks that can present encourage innovation and quality in the joint reflection and exchange, also for other disciplines.

During the course of the tuning project there have been not five but seven networks working in synergy, of which five (Business, Education Sciences, Geology, History and Mathematics) were newly created and two (Physics and Chemistry) already existed. Existing networks such as CLIOHNet (History), EUPEN (Physics) and the Chemistry Thematic Network have become involved, and numerous discipline-based discussions, debates and presentations have taken place at national and international levels within all the disciplines involved. Of the 105 university departments participating in these seven networks, we can say that most have done so at a significant level of work and achievement, and have responded very quickly to the high pace demanded by the project. This work will continue until the final report is published.

2. To bring about a high level of Europe-wide convergence in Higher Education in the five main subject areas (Mathematics, Geology, Business, History and Educational Sciences) by defining commonly accepted professional and learning outcomes.

It is through the work of the many institutions and academics involved at national and international level, that it is possible to reach an initial definition of what is common, diverse, and dynamic in higher education in Europe. This understanding is the path to a convergence which respects and promotes diversity. The work is naturally discipline-based and has extended to seven subject areas in all.

3. To facilitate transparency in the educational structures and to further innovation through communication of experience and identification of good practice.

The meetings and discussions that have taken place throughout the project have been very participatory and highly relevant. In particular the debates that took place during the meetings and which have continued via email between the meetings have contributed greatly to the project’s success. The general co-ordinators believe that in general the levels of debate, exchange of views and awareness have been very significant at all levels.

Transparency in relation to degrees has been attempted by the creation of the lines of analysis favouring common terminology and tools for understanding.

4. To elaborate a methodology for analysing common elements and areas of specificity and diversity, and how to tune them.

The methodology has been elaborated on the basis of four lines of analysis of degrees, with the aim of discovering how to make them "more legible and transferable." This is in accordance with the Bologna Declaration, which calls for the "Adoption of a system of easily readable and comparable degrees."

The four lines are as follows:

Line 1: General and academic skills

Line 2: Knowledge, Core Curricula and Content

Line 3: ECTS as an accumulation system

Line 4: Methods of teaching and learning, assessment and performance, and quality

This methodology to move forward is regarded as one of the main contributions of the project and is an anticipated outcome.

5. To develop professional profiles and learning outcomes, as reference points, in the five plus two main subject areas (Mathematics, Geology, Business, History and Educational Sciences, as well as the two synergy groups of Physics and Chemistry) by defining commonly accepted professional and learning outcomes.

The seven working groups have after debate and exchange of views identified a set of subject-related competences. Indications have also been given of the most suitable location: in the first and/or in the second cycle.

A second anticipated outcome is developing these professional profiles and learning outcomes.

6. To develop and exchange information in relation to the development of curricula in these seven areas, and develop a model curriculum structure for each area, enhancing the recognition and European integration of diplomas.

Subject maps and core curriculum papers have been prepared for the seven subject areas. A significant level of analysis and comparison has been taken place.

7. To associate other subject areas where a similar process can be incorporated through synergy.

Two of the associated subject areas, Physics and Chemistry, have followed the Tuning process in full, becoming groups 6 and 7 of Tuning. Among the areas, where related projects are already underway, are Engineering, Languages, Humanitarian Development, Veterinary Science, Law and Medicine.

8. To build bridges between this network of universities and other appropriate qualified bodies in order to produce convergence in the five main subject areas

Part of the work towards this objective is still to be done, since the Tuning Steering Committee decided to postpone meeting professional bodies until the analyses were more completed in order to have some concrete elements on the table to debate.

In the near future the Tuning groups will be engaged in mapping the existing reality of Europe with respect to professional bodies and associations at national and European levels within each field, and to develop contact with such bodies in relation to each subject area. This corresponds to another anticipated outcome of the project, a platform for discussion with professional bodies.

9. To act in a co-ordinated manner with all the actors involved in the process of tuning of educational structures (Ministries, Conferences of Rectors, and Universities).

The Conference of Rectors have been aware of Tuning since the start and were asked for their assistance in selecting participating Universities. In several countries the Rectors have developed close links with Tuning. The European Universities’ Associations have been present and active in all the Steering Committee meetings throughout the Tuning project. The national Ministries have been informed and in some countries have developed a significant working relationship with the Tuning Project.

In another respect the Tuning project has tried to build on what has been achieved before with respect to other Thematic networks and other projects. This has led to the continuous presence of international experts in both the Steering Committee and the subject area groups in order to enable this co-ordinated action.

The work followed in line 3, apart from providing an important line of analysis of European credits as units in the whole architecture of higher education, is envisaged to lead to another anticipated outcome: a common methodology for measuring workload. This is in accordance with the Salamanca Declaration, which states that "Universities are convinced of the benefits of a credit accumulation and transfer system based on ECTS and on their basic right to decide on the acceptability of credits obtained elsewhere." It is also in accordance with the Prague Communiqué in which "Ministers emphasised that for greater flexibility in learning and qualification processes the adoption of common cornerstones of qualifications, supported by a credit system such as the ECTS or one that is ECTS-compatible, providing both transferability and accumulation functions, is necessary."

Three other expected outcomes still remain to be reached. One is the reflection on the process followed and the identification of major obstacles to convergence. Another is a set of recommendations to the Ministries, the Conferences of Rectors, the Universities and the European Commission. In this final part, the management committee will co-ordinate the work of the groups to conclude these expected outcomes, together with the preparation of the final report.