Conferencia Estatal de Defensores Universitarios

VII ENOHE CONFERENCE: Hamburg 2009 (26-28 March)
Plenary lecture: "Implementing Bologna: The Impact on Campus Ombudsmen. Observations from Spain"
Pilar Abad-Garcia, DCU (UO)
U. of Valladolid (Spain)
Executive Comission (CEDU)

"….It is good for Europe that Universities are properly run and it is good to know that there are people committed to find better ways of doing things in the academic world…"

(Jacob Söderman, 1st European Ombudsman )

Paraphrasing Jane Austen, one could say that it is a "truth universally acknowledged" that most European countries, Spain among them, are more or less immersed in the process of adapting their Higher Education systems to the new demands of `Bologna´.

In this regard, Spanish University Ombudsmen feel very much concerned, and their interest is perfectly understandable given their condition of Campus Ombudsmen, that is, of being very near the effects and consequences of the process as well as by the fact of being within reach of the members of the academic community.

The abovementioned interest is also shown in the decision made by the Spanish Association of University Ombudsmen (CEDU) of establishing a permanent Workshop devoted to the Bologna process in their annual general meetings.

So far, this decision has been embodied in two successive Workshops held at the Madrid (2007) and Oviedo (2008) Conferences.

The first was a sort of general statement of principles issued by the Spanish University Ombudsmen (UO) with regard to `Bologna´ and other concerns.

The second has turned out to be more specific in its issues since here the UO raised the matter from a more pragmatic point of view, and very much aware of the old proverb: "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" or, to put it more briefly, "Better safe than sorry" as regards the transition to the European Higher Education Area (EHEA).

And it is precisely this idea, linked to the question of the Spanish transition to `Bologna´, that will mainly concern us for the most part of this speech, together with other observations or comments on the potential contribution of UOmbudsmen to the Bologna process.


I.The bounties of `Bologna´

The bounties of Bologna are undoubtedly plenty. First and foremost, the process of building the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) will favour two possibilities, which, often, given our daily `technical´ pressures, we tend to forget. These possibilities are:

1. That of organizing the EU beyond strictly political and economic criteria, by means of promoting the development of strong bonds among European Universities and University members.

This idea is present in the Preamble to the Magna Charta Universitatum (1988): "…. The undersigned Rectors of European Universities ….. looking forward to far-reaching co-operation between all European nations and believing that people and States should become more than ever aware of the part that universities will be called upon to play in a changing and increasingly international society." (:1)

2. That of providing a transnational and solid civic education in common ethical and democratic values and open to the new globalised situation, as stated in the Bologna Declaration (1999): "…A Europe of Knowledge is now widely recognized as an irreplaceable factor of social and human growth and as an indispensable component to consolidate and enrich the European citizenship…. with an awareness of shared values and belonging to a common social and cultural space." (: )

And, fortunately, both ideas still inspire the 2007 London Communiqué : "…Building on our rich and diverse European cultural heritage, we are developing an EHEA based on institutional autonomy, academic freedom, equal opportunities and democratic principles that will facilitate mobility …etc" (: 1.1.3)
On top of this, as we all know, the `Bologna´ process, undoubtedly, also provides great `technical´ assets, such as, very briefly:

- Accreditation of Universities
- Teacher/student mobility
- Research mobility (both facts go to encourage the sense of European identity, given the experience of adaptability)
- Transparency (Diploma Supplement)
- Lifelong learning
- Promotion of new approaches to learning (which will imply a significant decrease in teacher/student passivity).


II. The shortcomings of `Bologna´

Yet `Bologna´ also has its shortcomings. The hopeful picture shown above is not free from potential problems in some of the different abovementioned realms, particularly as regards: academic mobility which is still in need of care and support, and new approaches to teaching (and learning) which will have an effect on both students and teachers.

With regard to academic mobility, the Berlin Communiqué (2003) proclaims: "... Mobility of students and academic and administrative staff is the basis for establishing a European Higher Education Area."

This is no novelty. As has been said, the roots of academic mobility can be traced back to the Middle Ages and its scope widely reaches our days. It has become one of the main goals in the Bologna process, something to be fostered and improved as Europe´s competitiveness demands internationally trained human resources, and, well qualified people are more "mobile", more adaptable in the face of change and more accessible to the European labour market (WUTTIG: 2-3).

However, this desirable phenomenon, whose advantages have been widely demonstrated in current mobility programs (Erasmus etc), is not free from difficulty. Its main obstacles have been clearly listed:

- Insufficient recognition of foreign qualifications
- Underlying legal conditions (visas, work permits)
- Others related to the social and economic background of students (: 13)

Solutions have been suggested by the European ministers of education: the implementation of the Lisbon Recognition Convention; the easing of requirements for visas and work permits; and the increase in social (health care) and economic support (grants, loans etc), facts, by the way, still much in need of improvement.
Also, a 2008-Report from the European Commission suggests that the structural `Bologna´ changes may lead either to temporary stagnation or decrease in student mobility .

To these, other no lesser difficulties must be added: the lack of language and cultural preparation (: 15) a most necessary tool for a successful transnational mobility; the lack of respect for learning agreements, and the lack of logistical support, integration help and follow up of the stay at the host Institution, etc (: 16)

In order to cope with these problems, Institutional co-operation is obviously much needed: ".... to ensure successful growth of transnational (horizontal) mobility in Bachelor and Master programmes, the close cooperation and concrete agreements between individual universities or groups of universities, will be even more important than before...." and in this respect, "... University networks which have adopted common quality standards will become increasingly important...." (:19)

Taking all this for granted, it could be said or properly expected that some or many of these difficulties may, or rather, will have an impact on UO´s Offices

With respect to the second abovementioned problem, linked to new approaches to teaching and learning in the process of transition to `Bologna´, we can say that, to a large extent, the difficulties will arrive as a consequence of an increase in the degree of demanding expectations, of demands and requirements, as much in relation to Universities as to teachers and students.

In this respect, our Universities and Higher Education Institutions will have to cope with questions like:

- globalisation (competitiveness, cultural diversity, cooperative networking) (BRICALL: 33)
- funding
- infrastructure
- e-learning
- development of new Regulations or normative frameworks
- administrative procedures, etc

Besides this, teachers will be expected to provide a higher teaching and research performance; and students will also be required to put up a higher learning performance, whilst, at the same time, the predictable increase in fees will make the latter more demanding and ready to submit a claim.
Again, the impact and effect on U Ombudsmen´s Offices may be easily predictable.

III.The Spanish Transition to `Bologna´.-

The Spanish process of transition to the EHEA is moving forward, although somewhat behind schedule: the degree of implementation still varies from university to university.

As regards Spanish students and teachers, and generally speaking, I would say that a majority of them could be considered ready and willing to accept the new EHEA, although there is still scepticism, and, above all, a lack of understanding and a lack of information. On top of this, there is also a fear that Bologna´s emphasis on efficiency might cast a shadow over the relevant role of the University as a base for critical and scientific thought.

In any case, `Bologna´s seminal methodological idea from "teaching" to "learning" means a radical change in the old Spanish Higher Education system. To start with, `Bologna´ demands a decrease in both teachers´ and student´s academic passivity, as well as a more direct and close cooperation between students and teachers. Needless to say that, in this respect, the relevance of the human side of their relationship will come to the foreground.

The first point deserves some comment. Again I feel I have to start by mentioning the Magna Charta: "… Rejecting intolerance and always open to dialogue, a university is an ideal meeting-ground for teachers capable of imparting their knowledge …. and students entitled, able and willing to enrich their minds …"

Strictly speaking, this idea can be said to be as old as the hills, yet in the Spanish process of transition to EHEA, it becomes extremely meaningful in that it implies, to put it in a nutshell, that the old University system (passive memorizing and final exam feedback) has to be replaced by new, more active, methods of learning obviously affecting both students and teachers.

As regards the latter, they cease to be almost exclusively passive "lecturers" and examiners and become pro-active by producing new ways of guiding and stimulating the students´ work. At the same time, teachers will have to closely follow, not only the academic development of students, but also, their personal and even professional development.

As regards students, they cease to be passive listeners and learners and have to actively commit themselves to their formative process. This fact means that, on the one hand, they will have to get ready for active participation in small groups, which undoubtedly will develop their capacity for independent, critical thought. On the other, they must get ready to submit themselves to processes of Continuous Assessment (ECTS) which will measure their academic effort.

Besides the foregoing, other difficult aspects will come to light. Let us take a look at them bearing in mind the suggestions received from UO of different Spanish Universities and other sources. This will be done on two different levels: teachers and students:

1.Teachers:
As regards teachers, they will have to cope with two main kinds of difficulties: teaching and research problems

1.a. Teaching problems:
First and foremost, I must mention the general difficulties for Spanish teachers in the process of giving up old habits and adapting themselves to the requirements of the new EHEA. They can no longer be mere transmission belts of knowledge but must commit themselves to their new role as means in the process of learning (BRICALL: 31). The difficulties decrease, for instance, in the case of the teaching staff of English studies Departments, usually more in contact with British and American academic procedures.

Secondly, we must notice that, in this context, the workload increases considerably given the dynamics of the new Degrees. Consequently, teachers have to organise a more complex system of student´s work, based on the combination of Knowledge, acquisition of competences (generic & specific) and skills according to some quality norms.

Besides, teachers have to cope with a new system of Assessment of student performance, in ECTS terms, a question which also involves more complexity. In the first place, teachers will have to work out Assessment Criteria taking a variety of issues into account: Knowledge, tutorial activity, study & work hours etc. In the second, they will have to decide on the methods of Assessment: continuous or final exam (or both), depending on the results to evaluate or assess.

This new Assessment aspect will most probably at the start produce, grading problems, bringing with it an increase in conflict which may end up in U. Ombudsmen´s Offices.

Thirdly, staff problems will also take place in Spanish Universities. These will have to do with teachers, formerly in charge of topics in the old syllabus, who cannot be integrated in the new Degrees (Bachelor or Master).

In the fourth place, especially at the start of the Bologna implementation, many Spanish teachers will have to make compatible their teaching in both, the old system ("Licenciatura") and the new Degrees, something that compels them, shall we say, to keep "open" both systems and their different procedures.

Last but not least, the process will demand of teachers a greater adaptation and use of new technologies as well as an increase in bureaucratisation.

1.b. Research problems:
Spanish teachers have also shown their concern about the question of research in the `Bologna´ framework.
In this respect, they believe they will have less time to devote to research activity, and are also concerned about the risk of "Marketisation" or excessive commercialisation of Universities in the name of efficiency.

As we know, the latter may produce both conflicts of research malpractice as well as neglect of scientific integrity, aspects which again may end in UO´s Offices.

2.Students:
On their part, Spanish students will face their own learning problems:

Their workload will also comparatively increase given the leading methodological trend in the new Degrees.

Their access to Master Degrees will depend on criteria established by Universities and is not guaranteed. There is also concern about the possibility that Universities may limit the number of students, and, consequently, this concern reaches the way in which candidates might be selected. As regards the possibility of Masters abroad (vertical mobility), there is concern about the possible brain-drain of the best students. (WUTTIG: 17)

Students will have to undergo a more diverse and complex new system of Assessment (ECTS) with regard to which we can readily infer an increase in disagreement. Consequently, Spanish UO highly recommend the need of specific Assessment regulations.

Besides this, the possibilities of Continuous assessment and academic attendance become a problem for part-time and handicapped students, as well as for the so-called "new" students: young adults, second chancers, and second biters (BRICALL: 30)

Last but not least, and leaving aside other social and economic difficulties (grants, loans), students will have to cope with the problem of Recognition, since, often, qualifications are not sufficiently recognised and this fact, as has been said before, may hinder the process of mobility. (:19 ff)

On top of this, organisations of Spanish students have recently shown their awareness that the activity of Campus Ombudsmen will increase in the new EHEA.

To conclude this part of my speech, I must say that, in my view, to prevent these kinds of problems, or to warn against them, does not mean to put a spoke in the wheel of the whole Bologna process but quite the opposite. It means that the UO is not only a system of solving conflicts, but also of preventing them, and that both European experts and University authorities, besides promoting and taking account of institutions like the UO, must strive to ease those problems, otherwise they will be a source of conflict and claim at U.Ombudsmen´s Offices.

(I proceed to deal with my final observations in this speech concerning)

IV. `Bologna´ and the University Ombudsman

I must begin by saying that, as we all know, the figure of the UO is a latent image in the Magna Charta Universitatum since the start: "…. Each university must ….. ensure that its students´ freedoms are safeguarded, and that they enjoy conditions in which they can acquire the culture and training which it is their purpose to possess." (:2)

In this respect, the Spanish Higher Education Law (LOU 6/2001; LOMLOU 4/2007) where the Institution of the Campus Ombudsman is mandatory, widens the scope and introduces the guarantee of the rights and freedoms of also the rest of members of the University community (teachers and administrative staff).

In this context, the UO, beside his/her abovementioned main watching function over the fulfilment of University Regulations and other academic issues, has another no less important duty: that of developing his /her activity, as has been said, in the interval between Ethics and Norm (VALLS: 2004). That is, the UO has also to care about the fact that values like equity and dignity are respected and observed within the University realm. That is, again, his authority is to a large extent a moral matter, based on the latin concept of auctoritas, as he lacks any legal or executive capacity.

With these seminal attributes, how can the UO be useful to the Bologna process? What can the UO do in this respect?

To answer these questions I have to go back again to the foundations of such process, first to one of the fundamental principles in the Magna Charta: "A University is the trustee of the European humanist tradition; its constant care is to attain universal knowledge; to fulfil its vocation it transcends geographical and political frontiers, and affirms the vital need for different cultures to know and influence each other." (:2); then to the Bologna Declaration whose definition of a "Europe of knowledge" states the following: "A Europe of knowledge is now widely recognised as an irreplaceable factor for social and human growth and as an indispensable component to consolidate and enrich the European citizenship, capable of giving its citizens the necessary competences to face the challenges of the new millennium, together with an awareness of shared values and belonging to a common social and cultural space." (:1)

To sum up, both declarations, given their focus on the social and European dimensions of the process, fundamentally, emphasize the following ideas:

a.the University as site of the humanist spirit
b.the University as a factor of social and human growth
c.the University as breeding ground of European citizenship

that is, as has been said, "… (Universities) cultivate the European values and culture."

The humanist idea underlies two of the basic tasks of higher education Institutions according to the guidelines of the EUA Bologna Handbook (2008):

1. That of rethinking the Institution along strategic lines (C1) (a)
2. That of embedding in it a quality culture (C2) (b)

The first mentioned task (C1/a) has to do, among other things, with the building of general strategies for Universities which include aspects like the mission of the University, which, in my view, and in its deepest sense, is to educate free and cultivated person-citizens, and not only to train professionals, and as such, they have failings and strengths besides being the main actors in the process that concerns us here.

As regards the second (C2/b), the abovementioned Spanish Higher Education Law, defines the figure of the Campus Ombudsman as one devoted to the improvement of University Quality in all its offshoots, and ruled by the principles of independence and autonomy.

In this respect my view is that both tasks are close to the UO´s nature and function. As I have pointed out before in our previous Conference in London, the UO is especially concerned with the human side of the Bologna process given his main concern for the first and foremost asset of Universities: their human capital. That is, as we all know, at bottom, the UO is often concerned with ethical teaching and research values, academic integrity, and aspects of human or even humane quality in his/her daily task.

Besides this, as I mentioned above, the UO has also to deal with strictly academic conflict and the fulfilment of University norms.

Consequently, in my view, the UO could be a part of the "quality culture" project endorsed by the EUA, as a shared value and collective responsibility (5) in our Universities. UOmbudsmen may cooperate or do their bit in both tasks, singularly Campus UO given their position inner to the Institution and their capacity of immediate intervention. The U/CO, by means of fair and sensible dialogue, can contribute to make too self-centered people aware of the fact that general interest should prevail over the individual, and invite them to the practice of values of coexistence (tolerance and respect)

Let us remember that this capacity of cooperation has been openly admitted by the European Commission in its Recommendation on the "European Charter for Researchers" which demands "ethical principles for researchers" (:45) as well as the figure of an "…. impartial (ombudsman-type) person to deal with complaints/ appeals of researchers, including those concerning conflicts between supervisor (s) and early-stage researchers.." (:56); and also, for instance, the Director of the UNESCO Chair in Madrid has suggested that UOmbudsmen should be ready "…. to take follow up actions on the processes and outcomes of QA. …" (MICHAVILA: 2004) . Other entities (European U. Ass / EUA); European Network for QA /ENQA) just admit their awareness of the need for co-operation with other implied agents in the process of promoting "quality culture" (8)

That is, as shown above, the UO might be understood as a figure closely associated to the nature, development and functioning of higher education institutions.

Finally, a few lines on the relationship between UOmbudsmen and the idea of the University as breeding ground of European citizenship. In this regard, I believe that UO´s basic concern for, say, "human quality culture" as well as their inner proximity to University members (home and guest), may allow the figure to become a potential fosterer of the spirit of European identity and, again, do his bit in the process of building that sense of awareness present in the Preamble to the Magna Charta: "… peoples and States should become more than ever aware of the part that universities will be called upon to play in a changing and increasingly international society." (:1)

That is, in my view, UOmbudsmen can play a part in the process of raising an awareness of the principles of European citizenship necessary to the social articulation of the EU, a relevant part of which is the EHEA (MICHAVILA:2006) an event that involves the lives of more than a half of the population of Europe.
As a consequence, the co-operation of Governments and Universities demanded by the Magna Charta for the benefit of the Bologna process, can be also demanded of European Ombudsmen and Ombuds.´ Associations or Networks like ENOHE with the same objective in mind. The UO can be one more link in the process of building the EHEA as a figure ready to work in favour of the consolidation of European citizenship and "quality culture" in academic institutions.

To sum up, with the above premises, as Campus Ombuds. and despite the difficulties, my final glance at `Bologna´ from Spain in this speech is a hopeful one. The beginnings may be difficult, yet, in a few years, when the implementation of the EHEA be a full European reality in our countries, I firmly believe that the effort will have been worthwhile. Then, the desirable "society of knowledge", with its academic, human and democratic social values, will, undoubtedly, contribute to devise a new and richer concept of our European Union (EU).



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 There is a study under way in this respect ( www.daad.de)

2 "second chancers" = university students in full maturity, unable to have had the university experience when they were younger; "second biters" = people who go back to University for more academic education.

3 EUA: "Forward from Berlin: The Role of Universities to 2010 and Beyond" (2003)

4 "… (the UO) potential contribution to the "quality culture" project, by means of cooperating, from within, with quality Departments and Agencies and so virtually becoming …. a new indicator in the process. This possibility would imply the evaluation of U. Ombuds.´s Offices (Cras: 2006). Abad-Garcia, P. "How the Ombudsman adds value to Bologna: (human) Quality Assurance (hQA)" (London, April 2008)

5 EUA Quality Culture in European Universities: A Bottom-up Approach. (2002-2006)

6 ".... Institutions as much as individuals are responsible …that is why the conditions of integrity must be managed inside the institution for the prestige and authority of the University…" (BARBLAN: 9).

7 Michavila, F. "El Papel de los Defensores Universitarios en la construcción de la ciudadanía europea" (Madrid: January 2004)

8 TRENDS IV (2004-05); Standards & Guidelines for QA in the European Higher Education Area (2005)

REFERENCES

Abad-Garcia, P. "El Defensor Universitario y el Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior (EEES)" (Malaga, July 2007)

Abad-Garcia,P. "El Defensor Universitario y el Proceso Europeo de Garantía de la Calidad Universitaria" (Madrid, October 2007)

Abad-Garcia,P. "How the Ombudsman adds value to Bologna: (human) Quality Assurance (hQA)" (London, April 2008)

Barblan, A., et al. (2007) Academic Malpractice. Threats and Temptations. Bologna, Bononia UP

Bricall, J.M. "Tendencias recientes en las universidades", Revista Cultura Económica, XXV, nº 68, Mayo 2007

ENQA: Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area ( 2005)

EUA: "Forward from Berlin: The Role of Universities to 2010 and Beyond" (2003)

EUA: Quality Culture in European Universities: A Bottom-up Approach. (2002-2006)

EUA Bologna Handbook (2008), Berlin: Raabe Academic Publishers

European Commission: European Charter for Researchers. The Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers (March 2005)

Glasgow Declaration: Strong Universities for a Strong Europe (2005)

London Communiqué: Towards the European Higher Education Area (EHEA): responding to challenges in a globalised world. ( 2007)

Michavila, F. "El Papel de los Defensores Universitarios en la construcción de la ciudadanía europea" (Madrid: January 2004), in: Perez Peña, J. et al. (2004) Los Defensores Universitarios y el reto de la calidad. Madrid: Dykinson

Reichert, S. & Ch. Tauch. 2004-05. TRENDS IV (EUA)

Standards & Guidelines for QA in the European Higher Education Area (2005)

The Management of Integrity: Universities and Academic Malpractice (Bologna, September 2007)

Toledo, F., E. Alcón & F. Michavila (eds)(2006) Universidad y Economía en Europa. Madrid: Tecnos

Valls, R. "Foreword", in: Perez Peña, J. et al. (2004) Los Defensores Universitarios y el reto de la calidad. Madrid: Dykinson

Wuttig, S. "Understanding Mobility and Recognition" in: EUA Bologna Handbook (2008) (B 3. 1-1), Berlin: Raabe Academic Publishers (:1-26)