Search

The European Higher Education Area (EHEA) is an international initiative for the harmonisation of higher education (HE) systems in 49 countries. Literature about UK's participation in the EHEA is limited, and the role of EHEA's membership for the UK, particularly after the end of the Brexit transitional period, has not been researched. The originality of the study reported in this paper is in addressing this gap by exploring the perspectives of key UK HE actors on the strategic significance of UK's memberships in the EHEA post-2020 for the UK. The paper draws on the theoretical ideas of rational choice neo-institutionalism, differentiated Europeanisation and internationalisation, and a thematic analysis of 19 official communications of key stakeholders and six in-depth interviews with their representatives. The findings contribute to filling in a significant gap in the literature about Bologna in the UK in making a distinction between its two memberships in the EHEA and the differences and complexities of the roles they play in constructing UK's overarching agenda in HE particularly in the post-Brexit context. The article has also contributed to the literature about Bologna more widely, presenting an investigation into differentiated Europeanisation that has been taking place within one unique post-EU country. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Higher Education Area was implemented as a result of the Bologna Process and set the mobility of students and staff as its main goal, suggesting tools to facilitate it. The European Union has supported the suggested measures, as mobility can be a way to support a common European identity and a strategic way to improve the quality of higher education institutes. Architectural studies, due to their special character as both an art and a science discipline, are chosen as the education area most suited for mapping degree mobility and highlighting the characteristics that differentiate each school in terms of attraction to international students. How do architectural students select the school to continue their studies? On what criteria is that based? There were more than 351 schools of architecture in the European Higher Education Area with 49 participating countries at the time the research was conducted. Do international students choose them at the same degree? What makes a difference between them, causing some of them to become famous schools of excellence while others are barely visible in the international competition? To answer the above questions, a research based on two questionnaires was conducted during the academic year 2018-2019. The aim of both questionnaires was to map the state of the art in architectural studies and determine the criteria students value the most to make their choices at master studies. The process of combining the data collected from both questionnaires showed that the study programmes and the city or country of the school are the main reasons for master's students to choose a specific school and for schools to stand out. This is followed by the criteria: offered studies' quality, institution's reputation, teaching language, the host city's economy, giving students the possibility to work during and/or after studies, the offer of third cycle. The paper concludes suggesting changes schools could implement if they wish to get a better position in the competitive market of attracting international students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista de Lengua para Fines Específicos is the property of Revista de Lengua para Fines Especificos and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Twenty years after the signing of the Bologna Declaration, this special issue contributes to a discussion of the Bologna process with a particular focus on the implementation of the two-cycle degree structure (3+2) and the practices and paths of higher education students. In this introduction, it is argued that there is a need for more research concerning the policy as text, that is, the way the Bologna process is enacted by students and teachers in their daily practices. The 3+2 degree structure has indeed affected the practices of students, particularly by introducing a new transition and decision point in many countries. However, when considering the Bologna policy as text, it becomes visible that there are differences in the students' concerns and practices across the six countries represented in the papers in the issue. This is not only the case due to differences in the national contexts prior to the Bologna process, but also to the role of other factors affecting the enactment of the policies. Thus, there are variations in the implementation – for example, concerning the social dimension – and the enactment differs due to national as well as programme differences, and differences related to academic disciplines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Politica y Sociedad is the property of Universidad Complutense de Madrid and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Navigating the complexities of establishing sustainable micro-credentialing programs in European higher education requires a tailored approach for providers. The goal of this research is to develop an assessment tool that enhances the implementation and recognition of micro-credentials in European higher education. This article introduces the INVEST Micro-credentialing Capability Maturity Model (MCMM), designed to assist educational institutions in assessing and enhancing their readiness for micro-credential establishment. Through a systematic six-stage process, we identify supportive conditions, specify levels of process maturity, develop domains and aspects, characterize levels of capability, consult with stakeholders, and finalize the model. The resulting Capability Maturity Model (CMM) outlines five levels of process maturity encompassing educational, administrative, regulatory, and collaborative aspects, aligning with the principles outlined by the European Union (EU) initiatives for micro-credential establishment. Through establishing clear objectives, the model aids in the strategic development and evaluation of micro-credential programs. Stakeholders are offered a comprehensive roadmap to evaluate their progress, identify required resources, and strategize for further advancement in micro-credentialing initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Learning innovation is a positive approach on the contemporary higher education international stage. This article stresses the need to devise physical spaces that are also innovative. For that purpose, using a qualitative methodology, we investigated recent trends based on the synergies between certain creative disciplines: architecture, music, and fashion. The comparison was based on compositional features and formative dimension. Using a qualitative methodological comprehensive approach, a set of case studies was analysed. The findings show the usefulness of activating these synergies as effective strategies when enriching educational processes in different ways. Six cases of excellence wherein university physical spaces reached levels of innovation were studied, representing relevant transfers among the three disciplines. The text presents examples that show the educational consequences in the establishment of those synergies, in terms of both composition (music-architecture) and the activation of heritage sites in the city as venues of learning innovation (fashion-architecture). The basic conclusions were based on the fact that the increase in teaching and spatial creativity that emanates from said synergies among the three disciplines can be potentially extrapolated to other areas of knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]