On 8-9 December in Aghveran, Armenia, a Bologna Seminar on student participation in higher education governance was co-organised by the Ministry of Education and Science of Armenia, the European Students’ Union and the Council of Europe.
The objective of the seminar was to look into topical issues of student participation in higher education governance and quality assurance, from institutional to national and international levels, outlining the main problems and obstacles, looking for examples of good practice and proposing a way forward.
Background
Student participation in the governance of higher education is an important part of the European Higher Education Area. At the ministerial meeting in Prague in May 2001 the ministers put increased emphasis on student participation by underlining that “students are full members of the higher education community” and through the recognition of students as “competent, active and constructive partners” in the establishment and shaping of the European Higher Education Area. Ministers affirmed that students should participate in and influence the organization and content of education at universities and other higher education institutions. At the ministerial meeting in Berlin in September 2003 the ministers acknowledged that ‘students are full partners in higher education governance. Ministers note that national legal measures for ensuring student participation are largely in place throughout the European Higher Education Area. They also call on institutions and student organizations to identify ways of increasing actual student involvement in higher education governance”.
Since then the importance of student participation has been reaffirmed in most official Bologna documents. At the Budapest-Vienna ministerial meeting in May 2010, which established the European Higher Education Area the ministers stated that they ‘fully support staff and student participation in decision-making structures at European, national and institutional levels’. And yet at its 21st European Students’ Convention (ESC) on 18 February 2011 the ESU’s Chairperson, Bert Vandenkendelaere said: “A promise of the Bologna Process Framework was that students would be recognized as equal partners and involved at every level of decision making. Sadly enough this is, ten years after this promise was made, still non-existent. In no European country, students are involved at every level.”
So, what went wrong?
The objective of the Bologna seminar, which will take place on 8 and 9 December 2011 in Aghveran will be to look into the current (burning) issues of student participation in higher education governance, from institutional to national and international levels, outlining the main problems and obstacles, looking for examples of good practice and proposing a way forward. Participants: this seminar will around gather 100 policy-makers, representatives of higher education institutions, decision makers, staff and students. It is open to all 47 countries of the European Higher Education Area.

By Yauheni Preiherman. Although the level of academic freedoms in Belarus is far from desirable, the country's integration into the European Higher Education Process would greatly benefit the new generation of Belarusians and should be encouraged by European policymakers.
On 12 December 2011 the Bologna Working Group reviewed the application of the Ministry of Education of Belarus to join the European Higher Education Area (the Bologna Process). The group will announce its opinion during the Ministerial Summit of the Bologna Process member states on 26-27 April 2012. If the application is successful, the Belarus may discontinue being the last ‘non-Bologna’ state of Europe.
The application has provoked a mixed reaction inside and outside the country. The Belarusian Independent Bologna Committee set up by a group of experts in Minsk emphasized in its report that ‘without complex higher education reforms Belarus’s full membership of the European Higher Education Area will not be effective’.  And the European Students’ Union appealed to European states to block the country’s accession to the Bologna Process.
The argument that the Belarusian education system falls short of the Bologna standards is undeniable. Moreover, it cannot be brought close to those standards in the existing political realities. However, this should in no way be used as a counter-argument against Belarus’s membership of the European Higher Education Area.
Defying Bologna
The Belarusian way to the Bologna Process has been long and full of contradictions caused by political reasons. At the beginning of the 2000s the Belarusian government introduced a number of novelties to the education system that were supposed to bring it closer to the European Higher Education Area standards.
For example, high school education was extended from 11 to 12 years and universities started to award bachelor’s and master’s degrees in addition to the Soviet-style specialist degree. But beginning from 2004 and particularly after the 2006 presidential elections the Bologna-oriented reforms were ‘frozen’. It was a reaction to the growing dissatisfaction with the government’s policies among the youth, which the authorities explained by the ‘Western influence’. As a result, a series of counter-reforms were carried out that reintroduced some Soviet traditions such as 11 year long high school education and 5 year long university education.
In September 2011, the new Education Code entered into force. Some provisions of the Code clearly contradict the Bologna Process principles. For example, it established the principle of ‘responsible autonomy’ for universities. Essentially, this principle further limits the academic freedoms and autonomy of universities.
Interestingly, in parallel with the elaboration of the Education Code the Belarusian government again declared its willingness to join the European Higher Education Area.
Alternative Report
This month Belarusian Independent Bologna Committee released report 'Belarusian Higher Education: Readiness to the European Higher Education Area Admission'  which concluded that the Belarusian higher education system is not ready for the Bologna Process. The authors argued that Belarus needs a comprehensive transformation of the education system to become a generic part of the European education space.
They also suggested that the country’s accession to the Bologna Process should take place in three stages and be based on the ‘Road Map for Reforms’. The first stage envisages de-politicizing and state control elimination over higher education, in particular the re-installment of transparent and fair elections of university rectors. The second stage focuses on a legal framework reform. And the third stage includes such technical actions as the completion of the academic degree and qualification reform, the completion of the quality assurance system reform, and the establishment of the national system for supporting mobility.
Why Belarus Should Be a Part of the Bologna Process
There is no doubt that the Belarusian education system needs a fully-fledged reform in the ‘Bologna spirit’ and that the road map suggested by the Belarusian Independent Bologna Committee is essential for that. But it is extremely important that Belarus becomes a member as soon as possible even without such a reform. And here are three core arguments in favor of that.
First, applying ‘accession conditionality’ (i.e. membership only after reforms) will simply produce no results. The carrot of the Bologna Process is too small and of no big value for the incumbent government. Moreover, a comprehensive education reform that corresponds to the ‘Bologna spirit’ is inconceivable in Belarus without a reform of the existing political system which may or may not happen soon. Therefore, imposing ‘accession conditionality’ will have no impact on the state of higher education in Belarus.
Second, keeping Belarus out because of its politicized education system will only have adverse effects. It will further isolate the country and Belarusians from the rest of Europe. This would be particularly undesirable because ‘Bologna isolation’ will not hurt the regime, but primarily the young generation – the future of the country. On the other hand, opening the ‘Bologna door’ for Belarus will facilitate better social exchange and more contacts between people. In other words, it will be a new effective channel for transmitting European values to Belarus.
Importantly, the potential of this new channel will be much higher than that of the limited number of existing scholarship programs. The recent initiatives, such as the Open Europe Scholarship Scheme specifically designed for Belarusian citizens will do a great job in promoting Europe in Belarus. But capacity of such initiatives is limited. The number of students who are awarded scholarships and complete full degrees abroad is small. Therefore, letting Belarus in the Bologna Process will expose many more young Belarusians to European values.
Third, the Bologna Process will open a new window of opportunities for Belarusian universities. It will enable them to develop cooperation links with leading European universities. International research projects and exchange of experience, staff and students will gradually impact the academic quality of the higher education institutions in Belarus. As a result, the universities will produce better qualified graduates with foreign language skills and a higher degree of understanding how democracy and market economy works.
There is still a possibility that hardliners in the Belarusian regime will try to prevent the country's accession to the Bologna Process. But there is a hope that if they fail, young Belarusians will have a chance to experience the benefits of being a part of wider democratic Europe without borders. Yauheni Preiherman is Policy Director at the Discussion and Analytical Society “Liberal Club” in Minsk.

A fresh perspective and a new pilot scheme is needed to unify higher education across Europe, says Maastricht University's Professor Martin Paul. Not before time, the House of Lords in the UK has announced an inquiry into European Union support for universities and student mobility. By now, the vision of a single higher-education space across Europe was supposed to be a reality. But achieving that goal is taking longer than expected. The idea was that by 2010 students and academic staff would be moving freely between European countries and institutions, secure in the knowledge that the qualifications they achieved would translate between EU member states.
Some significant progress has been made in the 12 years since all this was first envisaged in the Bologna protocol, drawn up by 29 countries across Europe, and in the five years since recognition of common European degree standards was agreed in Lisbon. More than 210,000 students now spend part of their degree abroad through the Erasmus exchange scheme alone, and the number of academics crossing national borders to teach is increasing year on year.
But no-one would argue that we are anywhere near reaching all the goals these two agreements set out. A report last month on the Erasmus scheme showed that one in five students was forced to retake courses and exams after failing to receive full credit for studies abroad, while the European Commission has just put forward new measures to support the aims of the higher education area, including profiling institutions and giving financial support to master's students studying abroad.
In my view, we need to act faster than this. Educating young people, and, more important, preparing a European workforce, is becoming an urgent priority thanks to increasing competition from the United States, China, India and emerging countries. Add to this the economic crisis facing Europe, and the need to move fast to create more promising career prospects for our students becomes clear. We do not have time to spend painstakingly matching education qualifications and waiting for every institution in every country to reach exactly the same standards. For one thing, not every institution can, or should, be aiming to do the same things. Differentiation is important. Some universities are regionally focused, some nationally focused, and that is what they do best.
Other institutions, however, are much more advanced along the road of internationalisation. At Maastricht, our ambition has long been to be an international university with an international classroom. We have attracted attention in the UK since increasing the number of UK students we recruit fivefold over the past two years. Our motivation for this is our European and international agenda. We have a European law school, a European business school and a European public health programme. Our European focus and international outlook means we want students from the UK to join the thousands that already come here from other countries in Europe and beyond.
Of course, we are not the only ones. There are other institutions like ours across Europe that have similar missions. What we now need is a kind of pilot scheme bringing all these together, a sub group of universities that have been working in an international context for some time – perhaps one or two from half a dozen European countries – to be at the vanguard of creating the European higher education area. This group could gather evidence on what sort of education works in an international context, what professional skills students need, and what kind of careers they develop. It could produce a blueprint of what a European university should look like and what the quality of students should be.
This could be achieved very quickly because the institutions already exist. It would need European-level funding, but it would be an essential investment in Europe's future labour market. We already run many Europe-wide competitions for research grants. Why not run a similar competition for institutions wanting to be part of this pilot scheme? Then we could also stimulate a process that would make many institutions across Europe think about adopting a more European and international focus.
We badly need to develop the tools to be competitive in producing a knowledge-based workforce for the European and global market. But we have tried for 12 years to create a European higher education area on a macro level with mixed results. This big machine approach is not working. A smaller, more focused model, would increase our chances of success. Professor Martin Paul is president of Maastricht University.

The Bologna Follow-Up Group (BFUG), which manages the follow-up of the Bologna Process in between Ministerial Meetings, met last week (13-14 October) at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow, Poland. EUA participated actively on behalf of universities in the meeting hosted by the Polish EU Presidency. The BFUG members discussed priorities and themes for the next Ministerial Communiqué to be adopted in Bucharest in April 2012 and the progress of the different BFUG working groups that are expected to present reports and recommendations to ministers next spring. The work of the different groups (on issues such as mobility, degree recognition, transparency and the social dimension) can be found on the official European Higher Education Area website.
On Friday 14 October, the E4 Group (EUA, EURASHE, ENQA and ESU) organised a thematic session focusing on quality assurance. This included presentations on the external review of the European Quality Assurance Register for higher education (EQAR) and the preliminary results of the MAP-ESG project, which looks at how the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance (ESGs) have been taken up and whether they need revising (please see this story).
Discussions on the current state of the Bologna Process and future perspectives continued from 17 to 19 October with a special two-day event in Bucharest, Romania, entitled: “Future of Higher Education − Bologna Process Researchers’ Conference (FOHE-BPRC)”. This was organised by the Romanian Ministry of Education, Research, Youth and Sports and the Executive Agency for Higher Education, Research, Development and Innovation Funding (UEFISCDI) with the support of EUA. 
The conference gathered researchers on a range of higher education topics with a direct relevance for the Bologna Process (including a number of EUA representatives) from Europe and beyond. EUA very much hopes that the outcomes of these discussions will feed into the discussions on the future development of the Bologna Process. The publication resulting from the conference will be available to participants attending the 2012 Bologna Ministerial events and a presentation will be made by the General Rapporteur and Chair of the Editorial Board, Sir Peter Scott, Institute of Education, University of London.
EUA’s work was well presented through a selection of papers, in particular on themes such as quality assurance, funding, autonomy, and teaching and learning. To find out more about developments with the Bologna Process, please visit: www.ehea.info.

By Paul Jump. EU-funded project will develop affinities between institutions on two continents. While the Bologna Process of European integration in higher education may have its critics, it is hoped that a new European Union-funded project will launch Latin America down a similar road towards harmonisation.
The three-year, €3.5 million (£3.1 million) project, known as Alfa Puentes (Alpha Bridges), will see 23 umbrella organisations from across Europe and Latin America working together both to improve integration within Latin America and to improve links and mutual understanding between universities in the two continents.
One of those organisations is the Association of the Montevideo Group of Universities, most of whose member universities come from Argentina and Brazil. Its executive secretary, Álvaro Maglia, said greater integration of Latin American universities was necessary to enhance academic cooperation and to promote "a political project of regional citizenship".
Nicolás Patrici, executive secretary of the University of Barcelona-based Observatory of European Union-Latin American Relations, which will act as an intermediary between the eight European and 15 Latin American participants in the project, said that integration would drive up educational standards and create a "better space" for economic development in the region.
Dr Maglia said his organisation was one of the fruits of 20 years of "vigorous development" of integration in the south of the continent. He added that there was already a formal process of higher education integration within the Mercosur common market, founded in 1991 and currently composed of Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay, with a number of associate member nations in the region.
Mr Patrici, who is Argentinian, noted that the Andean region also had some experience of commercial integration via the Andean Community of Nations, set up in 1969 and currently comprising Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru. But he said governments' hopes that higher education could drive further regional harmonisation and development largely remained unfulfilled - due, in part, to the vast differences between Latin American countries' levels of development.
"Brazil and Argentina are better integrated than Brazil and Peru, even though Peru is also a neighbour of Brazil," Mr Patrici noted.
He said one of the key engines of European integration had been the development of a strong network of national university associations. But he said the capacity of such bodies in Latin America - and the level of political attention they received - remained very patchy. Hence, one of the major focuses of the Alfa Puentes project would be to boost the capacity of such associations.
Michael Gaebel, head of the higher education policy unit at the European University Association, which will lead the European element of the project, said strong university associations were a natural outgrowth of the increasing independence of universities from governments.
Rectors' clubs
"Associations in Europe used to be just rectors' clubs," he said. "They were on a budget basically decided in their ministry. If they wanted more money they went there individually and talked to officials. Now they have more of a policy role.
"Governments have realised they can no longer think out in a ministry what is good for the higher education sector. Now they have to consult it, and associations are one of the key partners in that process."
Recognising that integration across the entire Latin American continent is currently unrealistic, the main thrust of Alfa Puentes will be to support one major project selected by associations in each of Latin America's three major sub-regions.
The Andean Community will work on a common quality assurance regime, the Mercosur region will develop a strategy for greater internationalisation and mobility, and Central America and Mexico will try to establish a qualifications framework. But Mr Gaebel noted that all three projects were closely interrelated. "You can't think of having mobility and mutual recognition if you are not quality assured," he noted.
The project will also fund a major continent-wide survey of how universities are currently tackling such issues, and sub-regions will be expected to lend a hand with one another's projects, particularly where they have relevant experience of their own. For this reason, Dr Maglia expected that each sub-region would feel the benefit of the initiatives in many areas, in addition to the immediate issue it was working on.
Mr Gaebel's colleague Elizabeth Colucci, a programme manager at the EUA's higher education policy unit, said she hoped the project would also be a learning exercise for the six European university associations that the EUA had invited to participate.
"The Latin American universities are looking at regional convergence through a different lens and at a different point in time.
"The factors that contribute to their interest might be different for them and their solutions might be relevant to Europe, too," she said. She admitted that previous high-level rhetoric about creating a common higher education "space" between Europe and Latin America had not been translated into specific policy objectives.
"The space has never been defined apart from joint projects and exchanges," she said.
"That is where we took it up: we want to focus on the actors involved and creating tangible objectives."
Unusually for a largely EU-funded project, management of Alfa Puentes will be decentralised, with each Latin American sub-region, plus Europe, deciding how it wants to spend its portion of the funding. Mr Patrici admitted that loosening its control was a risk for the EU. "But the only way to build capacity is build capacity, not to pay a cheque," he said.
"The idea is to have stronger Latin American university associations and that has to be done by the Latin Americans."
He added that while the national associations of Spain and Portugal already had strong links with Latin America, the involvement of others - such as those from France, Germany and Poland - offered an opportunity for universities in those countries to forge stronger links with a "mirror continent" whose higher education system had been consciously modelled on the Spanish, French and German systems.
Rich pickings
An added incentive for Europe, Mr Patrici said, was the possibility of gaining greater access to the Latin American student market. He said populous Mexico offered the potential for particularly rich pickings given the decline in Mexican students choosing to study in the US over the past decade. All involved in the project stressed that even the specific sub-regional projects agreed upon would be very difficult to complete within the three-year funding period, and a Bologna-style process of full regional integration remained a very distant prospect.
But they also emphasised that the aim of the project was not to impose a European solution on Latin America. Europe's role, according to Mr Patrici, would be to share its ex-perience and act as "an example and a capacity builder" in the planned series of conferences and networking events. Mr Gaebel added that Europe could not offer a perfect solution to integration even if it wanted to - because it did not have one.
"People thought, for instance, that once we had (common) recognition (of degrees) in place there would be no barrier to mobility.
"But we have become more humble and realistic and we understand there is no systems solution to all problems," he said. This was because integration also required a "cultural change" among students, academics, managers and governors, he said.
"This explains some of the disappointment with the Bologna process in some quarters.
"Integration requires a system that has to be constantly maintained and developed and adjusted.
"But there is no doubt it can help you to be more international and to improve quality."

Bologna Seminar - New Perspectives for Master Study Programmes in Europe, Berlin, Germany (25-26 October 2011). The German Rectors’ Conference (HRK) and its project nexus are jointly organising the Bologna Seminar “New Perspectives for Master Study Programmes in Europe. Implementing the Second Cycle of Bologna – A European Success story?" which will take place from 25-26 October 2011 in Berlin, Germany.
In preparation for the ministerial conference in Bucharest in 2012, the Bologna Seminar seeks to focus on the current state of Master programmes in the European Higher Education Area. New developments for orientation and transparency on the rapidly increasing “Master-market” such as the marketing of Master degree programmes, recruitment of students, and implementation of lifelong learning will be discussed.
EUA Board Member and President of HRK, Dr Margret Wintermantel and EUA’s Senior Adviser, Howard Davies, will be speaking at the event. EUA’s Head of Unit, Michael Gaebel will also chair a workshop on “How to match Students and Programmes”. As part of the seminar, there is a call for posters which should relate to one of the three criteria: structure, target groups or recruitment strategies and discuss individual perspectives such as the challenges and opportunities faced and solutions to them. For more information, see the HRK website. See also Awarding Credit for Coursework, Recognising University Degrees.

By 2010 the Bologna Process aims to create a European Higher Education Area (EHEA), which will embrace the higher education systems of its 46 signatory countries. One of the EHEA’s main elements is the overarching framework of qualifications based on three cycles. Update no.8, September 2011.
However, many qualifications are professional as well as academic. More than 800 regulated professions are covered by EU legislation, which enables mobile professionals to practice and to establish in EU Member States other than the one in which they obtained their qualification. With the significant exception of the field of law, these professions fall within the scope of Directive EC/2005/36 on the Recognition of Professional Qualifications.
The Directive distinguishes between seven sectoral professions (medical doctor, dentist, nurse, midwife, veterinary surgeon, pharmacist, architect), transitional professions (where length of experience, rather than formal qualification, is the factor of paramount importance), and the general system into which all other regulated professions fall. Its substance derives mainly from earlier Directives, dating back to the 1970s. It takes no cognisance of the content of Bologna Process or the fact that Bologna has been enshrined in the national law of most EU Member States.
In October 2007, EUA convened a workshop of bodies concerned with the sectoral professions, including the European Commission and the European Parliament. The workshop explored the implications of the non-alignment of the Directive and the Bologna Process, with particular regard to length of qualification, curriculum design and the definition of learning outcomes, mobility and quality assurance. The documentation produced for and since October 2007 is available below.
•    Background paper to EUA workshop on sectoral professions, October 2007
•    Report of the workshop
•    Update no.1, April 2008
•    Update no.2, October 2008
•    Update no.3, June 2009
•    Update no.4, February 2010
•    Update no. 5, August 2010
•    Meeting on Directive 2005/36/EC in European Parliament, October 2010
• The Bologna Process and DIR 2005/36/EC: the points of divergence, Howard Davies, EUA Senior Adviser
• Evaluation of the Professional Qualifications Directive, Jürgen Tiedje, European Commission DG Internal Market and Services
• Report of the meeting held in the European Parliament on 14 October 2010, Howard Davies, EUA Senior Advise
• Update no. 6, February 2011
• Update no. 7, 23 May 2011
• Update no.8, September 2011
Future updates will appear regularly on this website. Inquiries should be directed to Howard Davies at howard.davies@eua.be.

European Higher Education Area website (the official Bologna Process website 2010 – 2012): http://www.ehea.info/.

Ministerial conference websites:
Prague 18 – 19 May 2001: http://www.bologna.msmt.cz/.
At their meeting in Bologna the Ministers decided to meet again in Prague in 2001, to assess the progress achieved and
settle priorities for the future development of the European Higher Education Area. Prague Summit is organised
under the auspices of the President of the Czech Republic, Mr. Václav Havel.
Berlin 18 – 19 September 2003: http://www.bologna-berlin2003.de/.
Realising the European Higher Education Area, Conference of European Ministers responsible for Higher Education. The follow-up meeting of the European Ministers in charge of Higher Education took place in Berlin on 18 and 19 September. Ministers reviewed the progress achieved since the Prague meeting in 2001 and set directions and concrete priorities for the next 20 months, before they met again in May 2005 in Bergen/Norway. The next meeting will take place in London, GB, in 2007.
Bergen 19 – 20 May 2005: http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/.
From Berlin to Bergen and beyond
Ministers responsible for higher education in 45 European countries met in Bergen on 19-20 May 2005.
Ministers took stock of the progress of the Bologna Process and set directions for the further development towards the European Higher Education Area to be realised by 2010.
This is the official Bologna Process web site for the period January 2004 - June 2005.
No changes will be done on this page from July 2005 and onwards.
From July 2005 the United Kingdom has established the new Bologna Process web site.
London 17 – 18 May 2007: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/.
The Bologna Process:  Bergen to London - 1 July 2005 to 30 June 2007
The UK provided a Secretariat to the Bologna Follow Up Group and its Board for the two year period up to 30 June 2007.  Our aim during this time was to provide information and news about the work programme and developments in the Bologna Process leading up to the Bologna 5th Ministerial Conference in London on 17-18 May 2007. Documentation on the Work Programme and the Conference, - including the London Communique and Bologna Process Stocktaking London 2007 - may be accessed via the relevant Meeting / Working Group folders or the Document Library of this website.  Other website pages provide information on related News and Events between July 2005 and June 2007.
The Bologna Process: 1 July 2007 to 30 June 2009
From 1 July 2007 responsibility for providing the Secretariat passed to the Benelux Countries and no further changes will be made to this website.  The new official website address is: http://www.bologna2009benelux.org/ and the contact email address for the new Secretariat is: secr@bologna2009benelux.org. The Bologna 6th Ministerial Conference will take place in Leuven/Louvain-la-Neuve on 28-29 April 2009.
The Bologna Process:  to June 2005
Documentation to June 2005 - including information on the Bologna 4th Ministerial Conference in Bergen on 19-20 May 2005 and the Bergen Communiqué - can be accessed via the official Bologna-Bergen website formerly managed by the Norwegian Secretariat.
Leuven – Louvain la Neuve 27 – 28 April 2009: http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/.
Welcome to the European Higher Education Area !
This website was the official website of the Bologna Process for the period 1 July 2007 until 30 June 2010. No changes will be made from July 2010 onwards. Permanent website of the European Higher Education Area officially launched on 5 July 2010.
Budapest-Vienna Declaration & Vienna Bologna Policy Forum Statement adopted
On 12 March 2010, the Minsters of the now 47 countries participating in the Bologna Process adopted the Budapest-Vienna Declaration and officially launched the European Higher Education Area. Read more. The Conference of the European Higher Education Area Ministers was followed by a meeting with Ministers from different parts of the world in the Second Bologna Policy Forum on "Building the Global Knowledge Society: Systemic and Institutional Change in Higher Education" that was concluded with the Vienna Bologna Policy Forum Statement.
On 28 and 29 April 2009, the Ministers responsible for higher education in the then 46 countries of the Bologna Process met in Leuven and Louvain-la-Neuve to establish the priorities for the European Higher Education Area until 2020. They highlighted in particular the importance of lifelong learning, widening access to higher education, and mobility. By 2020, at least 20% of those graduating in the European Higher Education Area should have had a study or training period abroad. For more details read the full Leuven/Louvain-la-Neuve Communiqué or see the conference website.
Budapest – Vienna 10 – 12 March 2010 : http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/.
This website was the official website of the Bologna Process for the period 1 July 2007 until 30 June 2010. No changes will be made from July 2010 onwards. Permanent website of the European Higher Education Area officially launched on 5 July 2010.

Background
Romania is the host country for the 2012 Bologna/European Higher Education Area Ministerial Conference and the Third Bologna Policy Forum. In preparation of these ministerial meetings and as a premiere, it will also hold a conference in Bucharest on 17-19 October 2011, aimed at bringing the researchers voice into higher education international level policy making. The results of the FOHE-BPRC will be presented to the participants attending the 2012 ministerial events both in written format, as well as via a presentation made by the General Rapporteur, Sir Peter SCOTT, Institute of Education, University of London. The innovative character of this event is given by the unprecedented opportunity for researchers dealing with higher education to interact and contribute to the political process shaping the European Higher Education Area, as well as national policy agendas in more than 100 participant countries in the 2012 ministerial events.
The Bologna Process Researchers Conference (BPRC) focuses on
    * (i) the Bologna Process and its effects on the European higher education landscape, and
    * (ii) the efforts made to define the national policy frameworks under which the EHEA tools could be implemented. The latter are illustrated by several major Romanian structural projects seeking to reform the higher education system. These projects are focused on themes of major interest at European level, such as: higher education leadership, institutional quality assurance, university rankings and higher education management.
Empirical evidence to support policies and reforms in higher education has often been a matter of local or regional focus. With the development of a pan-European process in higher education, there is a need to explore wider research topic areas, on which to base policies. In this context, the Bologna Process Researchers Conference is dedicated to collect evidence-based research, which has often been lacking during the last ten years, and to create a setting for bridging the gap between policy and research within the EHEA context.
The conference will enable discussion on key issues between various actors that don't usually interact (such as policy makers and researchers on HE) and draw on different approaches on the nature of European higher education.
Conference themes
Two main tracks have been identified.
The first thematic track is focused on specific Bologna developments and includes four topics that will be led by four thematic coordinators as follows:
    * - European Higher Education Area principles
    * - Teaching and learning (student-centred learning, employability, access to Higher Education)
    * - Quality assurance
    * - Mobility
The second thematic track is focused on additional Bologna developments while linking them to changes in the legal higher education system in Romania and includes four topics that will be led by four coordinators as follows:
    * - Higher Education Governance in the European Higher Education Area
    * - Higher Education Financing
    * - Diversification of higher education institutions missions as a response to global challenges
    * - Foresight/Futures of Higher Education Institutions
Each track will produce six research papers, each of them accompanied by reaction contributions that will be presented at the conference during the parallel sessions discussions.
Delivrables
The FOHE-BPRC conference will have as an outcome two volumes of Outcome of proceedings, corresponding to each thematic track to be part of the official documentation for the 2012 Bucharest Ministerial Conference and Third Bologna Policy Forum, as well as a possible input of the General Rapporteurs into the Conference proceedings. The Editorial Board for the two volumes will include the FOHE-BPRC General Rapporteurs and the thematic coordinators.

On 15 June, the Turkish authorities and higher education community marked the 10th anniversary of Turkey’s accession to the European Higher Education Area with a conference on “Bologna Implementations in Turkey after 10 Years”. The conference was organized jointly by the Turkish Council of Higher Education, Galatasaray University and Turkish National Agency. The Conference focused on the most important dimensions on the implementations of the Bologna Process and brought together the Rectors of all higher education institutions in Turkey, together with representatives from the National Student Union, the Vocational Qualifications Authority and other relevant stakeholders as well as international speakers. The Council of Europe provided a presentation on the achievements and challenges of qualifications frameworks.