SESSION SUMMARY: THE IDEA

OF THE BOLOGNA PROCESS V.

ITS REALITY
Danijela Dolenec
FRAMEWORK OF DISCUSSION
 In his opening address, Pavel Gregoric framed the discussion by
contrasting the idea of the B.P. - the potential that it carries on the
one hand, and the reality of its practice - its implementation
 5 distinguished speakers in this session: Pavel Zgaga from the
University of Ljubljana and four professors of the University of
Zagreb: Zarko Puhovski, Neven Budak, Zoran Kurelic and Sinisa
Rodin
 I focus on assessments made by the speakers, and the discussion
that ensued
ZGAGA
 Bologna is a success at the European level, but is compounded by
problems at the national level.
 the voluntary nature of this coordination process is both its key
strength and at the same time its key weakness.
 criticism towards national level implementation:
 Transvestism of national reform aims over to Bologna (e.g. B
requires that students pay fees)
 Excuse for domestic clashes
 'Brussels excuse - blame shifting, moving the responsibility for
the implementation of the reform to EU level '
HAUG 1999 KEY RISKS
 Countries introducing window-dressing reforms, superficial, non-
substantial
 Countries and universities underestimating the challenge from
abroad and the need for 'fresh air' in the lecture rooms
 Countries and universities underestimating the extent of change that
will come with the implementation of the Bologna reforms.
 CONCLUSION: invitation to ourselves to question the purpose and
mission of the university today. A way to think about this is through
the dichotomies of instruments v. values, competition v. cooperation
PUHOVSKI
 main argument: Bologna creates a prolonged period of immaturity
of the new generations
 Bologna means more discipline and less quality; it represents
movement from a free community to a school.
 With respect to its implementation, prof Puhovski characterised it as
a political and bureaucratic imposition on the university. One in a
long line of such impositions, starting in his example from Moscow
and Belgrade, now moving to Brussels.
 The response of the academic community, in his opinion, has also
been a repeating strategy, the strategy of sabotage.
BUDAK
 The implementation of changes was mechanical. It was
reactionary, primarily guided by the aim to keep existing staff
positions and protect the status quo.
 Results are:
 No modularity – possibility of combining coursework from
several schools or programmes
 No coordination with respect to learning outcomes and
acquired competences
 ECTS does not reflect actual student load (awarded instead
based on the professor's standing)
 Student evaluations have been introduced but they are not
circulated and openly discussed; they do not lead to any
outcomes
 Compounding problems:
 Insufficientinfrastructure for quality implementation: staff,
equipement, space
 Outside Unizg there is a severe shortage of teaching staff
 State funding is being reduced

 Like Puhovski, prof Budak agrees that the reform was imposed, it
came with political pressure and little time for preparations.
However, had more time been given, nothing would have
happened!
KURELIC
 Bologna in Croatia is a failed reform process.
 The Bologna in Croatia ('bolonja') is a perversion of the original
idea: it introduced a structural element that reduces the quality of
education
 The main objection is the fact that Croatian legislation introduced an
equivalence of previous 4-year Diploma qualifications and the
Bologna Masters qualifications.
 This produces curious outcomes in which a student with a Diploma
degree from Belgrade Uni can get an MA equivalent in Croatia and
enroll in Phd programmes, while a student with a Bsc degree from
Columbia Uni gets an equivalent of 'prvostupnik'
 Instead of creating a European HE Area, Croatia created a ‘Former
Yu HE Area'
RODIN
 Poses the question: was this misconception a clear policy choice?
 According to his assessment, it was – our policymakers were guided
by the objective of promoting protectionism: disabling both
incoming and outgoing mobility and insulating our job market.
 the original 2003 Science and HE Act shows that initially the
legislator was aware of the difference between a Diploma
qualification and a Bologna Masters qualification. However, in the
subsequent 2004 amendment this distinction was removed and all
holders of pre-B Diploma qualifications became MA holders. This
was futher petrified in the 2007 Academic Titles Act.
 He concludes that this was an uninformed and undeclared policy
which effectively 'torpedoed' the Bologna reform in Croatia.
 idea Reality

Affirmative assessment Zgaga

Kurelic & Rodin

Critical Optimist Budak Gregoric

Gregoric Zgaga
Budak

Negative assessment Puhovski Puhovski

Kurelic & Rodin
DISCUSSION

 Disputed voluntarism of the Bologna P.:

 political imposition v. Bologna as a an opportunity for change, ‘an
empty generality’
 Diversity of experience accross disciplines:
 successful example of the Medical School v. the conservativism and
closed-up mentality prevailing in the social sciences and humanities
 Structure v. agency debate:
 Responsibility of the academic community v. structural obstacles to
implementing B. reforms