The Myth of Power: Governing Reform in the Bologna Process of Higher Education

Abstract

How does one effectively reform higher education systems and structures in a transnational context? This is the key question countries have struggled with since their signing of the Bologna Declaration in 1999, which launched the Bologna Process and the development of a European Higher Education Area. Although, initiated by EU (candidate) countries, a voluntary governing model was opted for positioning the reform process independently of the EU decision making structures. Over time the national representatives stressed that national authorities should be responsible for (organizing) (higher) education. Now, after the twentieth anniversary of the Bologna Declaration, is a good moment to look back at the choices made thus far and the extent to which they were appropriate considering the ambition and scope of the Bologna agenda. During the last two decades, did the initiators and key participants in the Process sufficiently understand the role and responsibilities of the many stakeholders involved, including their own, to make policies a reality? What started as a process to align European higher education, that is a model to be based on two (later three) cycles, applying credits and to assure recognition using shared standards and guidelines for quality assurance, developed into the policy to shift from expert-driven education to a student-centred and active learning approach. As a result, the centre of gravity moved from policy making to policy implementation. This made the governing model – in both theoretical and practical terms – obsolete. Without the key players in the Process acknowledging this reality, the initial unilateral process had become multi-dimensional and multi-layered which meant it had been replaced by a multi-level governance model. Over the years, the auspicious initiative bogged down in a repetition of promises which proved only partly to be delivered by many of the countries involved.