EUA Survey Of Master Degrees In Europe - European University ...

3The notion of complianceand the process of transitionIn the same year, Richard Lambert and Nick Butler argued influentially that European universitiesfell far short of the standards set by the best-performing US institutions. New funding would haveto be generated by a range of public and private sources. Without accountability, however, theysaw no chance of such funding being forthcoming. Accountability, in turn, depended on improvedgovernance and greater autonomy at the level of the institution.By autonomy, Lambert and Butler meant the freedom of HEIs to manage their human and financialresources, to develop strategy in consultation with external stakeholders, to be responsible forcurriculum development and quality assurance, to engage in partnerships and consortial activity ona cross-border basis, and – above all – to diversify their revenue streams. This was standard practicein the public HE sector in the UK.Many recent reforms at national level have followed this line of thinking, spurred on by theperformance of British universities in international rankings, as well as by the European Commissionand bodies such as the OECD.Recent expressions of the same analysis show just how far Bologna and Lisbon have come to beregarded as co-extensive in policy terms; and how far the Master has become a key instrument inpolicy implementation. Bruegel, the Brussels-based think-tank, has declared that:‘The mission of graduate studies is to create a link between education, research and innovation. Themore advanced professional Masters provide high-skilled human resources to technology-basedenterprises, while research Masters and Doctorates provide the resources needed by universities and(public and private) research centres.’ [P. Aghion et al, Higher Aspirations: an agenda for reformingEuropean universities, p.19]In structural terms, this means that – with respect to the integration of the Bologna EHEA and theEU’s European Research Area [ERA] – the Master is a powerful driver.What has happened since 2007?Leaving Directive 2005-36-EC to one side for the moment, compliance with Bologna can be saidto be a legal obligation primarily at national level. Since the London summit, and since the timeof the situation described in Table A, legislative action by governments has further advanced theconsolidation of the three-cycle architecture. Two important examples testify to the momentumattained.In France, the August 2007 law on the libertés et responsabilités des universités, the so-called loi LRU,which principally addressed the issue of university autonomy, explicitly incorporated the Bolognadegree titles – ‘les grades de licence, de master et de doctorat’ – into Article L.612-1 of the Code del’éducation.In Spain, meanwhile, royal decree 1393/2007 paved the way for the three-cycle structure of Grado,Máster y Doctorado to be launched in 2008 and to be fully implemented by 2010.Elsewhere, a Bologna framework law was enacted in FYROM in 2008; in Serbia, too, legislation witha Bologna focus passed into law. In the same year, Slovenia legislated to enable joint degrees. Moreaction by governments is in the pipeline. In Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bologna implementation is formallyin motion. The Czech government envisages a new tertiary education act. In Greece, the Bolognaframework law 3549/2007 is to be followed by further legislation reforming postgraduate provision.In Lithuania, a draft law on Studies and Science, mainly addressing issues of funding and governance,awaits adoption. A Swedish informant spoke of an impending ‘avalanche’ of Bologna- and Lisbonrelatedlegislation.30