Not long ago, in everyday student life the choice of studies was straightforward and the reputation of a higher education institution depended on experiences of family members or on certain professors. Particularly high drop-out rates or students being examined in a way that made them fail their exams, thus forcing them to give up their studies, in the lower semesters were almost dismissed as a peccadillo – only the "tough ones" were to succeed.
The students' opinions or previous subject knowledge were negligible so that evaluations were not taken particularly seriously by anyone. "First generation" students often dropped out in their first semester because they were only supported under certain conditions in non-academic families and did not feel comfortable or at least well perceived in the academic world.
Stays abroad represented a fault line in the course of studies or life, and international lecturers and fellow students were generally regarded as exotic. The ivory tower was fiercely defended, it was questioned whether one's own teaching content could also be studied abroad. "Learning outcome" was a foreign word and "comparability" an “unword”; whether or not courses and examinations taken abroad were credited towards one’s degree programme sometimes depended on the goodwill of the deans of studies.
The curriculum itself had to adapt to the research and teaching subjects of the promoted professors. In general, it was not clear to the average students at the start of their studies what abilities and skills they would acquire by the time they completed their courses or their degrees. The personal time required for studies was not an issue – how could it have been proven anyway? It was measured in weekly hours from the perspective of the teachers. For students with jobs or families mobility, the constant attendance formats or the opening hours of the libraries were serious obstacles to successfully completing their studies.
On the other hand, there was less pressure during the degree programme, students were far less pragmatic, rarely chased ECTS credits, and contact with professors was also more personal, at least at the level of the diploma seminar. The countless projects in the library, the shared waiting in front of a broken photocopy machine or in front of closed doors despite apparent office hours, and the resulting resentment against certain lecturers also forged bonds for the time after graduation.
Such networks provided fertile ground for the transition from studies to a career; a career service or alumni service did not exist. A degree itself was regarded as a guarantee for a lifelong job, and actually, before the European harmonisation efforts through "Bologna", everything was better anyway because people liked to keep to themselves.
So far – so provocative, and exceptions, of course, prove the rule.
"Culture eats strategy for breakfast" – nevertheless, an incredible amount has changed at higher education institutions and for students in the past 20 years. Universities per se are dealing globally with five major areas of tension*: national priorities vs. European / international educational areas; regulations of the respective governments vs. institutional autonomy; increasing diversity vs. harmonisation efforts such as through the Bologna Process; competition vs. cooperation; intellectual property vs. open access.
Internationalisation.
Thus, no higher education institution today can afford not to actively promote mobility and internationality for students, lecturers, administrative staff and researchers. Or, conversely, not to offer non-mobile students at least the opportunity to acquire a basic level of intercultural skills within the framework of teaching, or to "experience the otherness", or to work on tasks with international participants in a virtual way in a protected space. The personal confrontation with different cultures of thought, education, work and organisation is just as indispensable in a globalised world of work as it is in the digital space that seemingly allows us all to grow together so easily and so closely.
Digital transformation.
In recent years higher education institutions have realised how ubiquitously digitisation affects them, with European strategies, initiatives and frameworks providing essential guidance. Examples include the publications of the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) ("European Framework for Digitally Competent Educational Organisations"), the white paper "Bologna Digital 2020: digitalisation of Higher Education in Europe" and the numerous projects that can be subsumed under Erasmus Without Paper (EWP), the European Student Card Initiative (ESCI) or Erasmus+ goes digital including an Erasmus+ app as a "single point of access" for students.
Transparency and innovative teaching.
Digital transformation is therefore evident in the administration of higher education institutions, in the service facilities that have grown eminently since the Bologna Process, such as quality assurance, teaching services; in information and organisation, in course evaluation, in higher education marketing and thus in tracking before, during (keyword: study activity) and after studies, in the retention of alumnae and alumni and, of course, in teaching and research. In teaching there are no longer any limits to the imagination of all those involved in the interaction of face-to-face and distance learning. The prerequisite for this is the necessary technical equipment, service, and time for the development of innovative teaching formats on the part of the lecturers.
The social dimension.
Due to flexible teaching in terms of time and place the alleged "digital natives" need self-organisation, acquisition and management of knowledge, media competence and a basic digital understanding. The effort involved is worthwhile but not easy to digest for everyone, especially as the student body is becoming increasingly colourful, which can be verified empirically.
In 2007 at the latest the ministers of science and education’s demand in the Bologna London Communiqué officially caused the ivory tower to shake heavily.
They demanded "[...] that the students entering, participating in and graduating from the higher education system should, at all levels, reflect the diversity of our populations."
The number of students sometimes decreases for demographic reasons, the students on average are getting older, they have families or jobs. A curriculum geared to the typical 18-year-old full-time student starting his or her studies immediately after completing school has not worked anymore for a long time. The academic view, counselling and guidance is therefore turning more and more intensively to the study entry phase and the individual framework conditions of the students.
Today's higher education institutions should and would like to offer all talented and motivated students a chance to complete their studies and to accompany them in the best possible way from the very beginning. Because even the most dazzling tower looks stale if it empties more and more and people turn away from it in disappointment.
Author: Regina Aichner, Team Coordinator of Data, Analysis, Bologna Process
* Sarah Guri-Rosenblit (The Open University of Israel) Internationalization of Higher Education: Navigating between Contrasting Trends, Bologna Researchers‘ conference 2014.
