By Ann McClure. In the movie “Idiocracy,” the world has degenerated to garbage-filled state where people don’t know basic farming. Could this fate be avoided by maintaining support for the liberal arts? “These graduates are more involved in their communities, vote more, give more to charity,” says Richard Ekman, president of the Council of Independent Colleges, which recently launched its Campaign for the Liberal Arts. Liberal arts students also have the communication and problem solving skills employers say they want, he adds.
John Churchill, secretary of The Phi Beta Kappa Society, notes that liberal arts prepares people for lifelong learning needed for a career, not just a job. “You don’t get that through a pre-set, rote experience,” he says. While PBK has always advocated for the liberal arts, leaders are planning to ramp up their efforts in that area. The current view of the purpose of higher education has become “narrow and shortsighted,” Churchill says, because of the laserlike focus on the economy. Training people for employment is important, but “it’s not long range enough for higher ed in general. And not broad enough,” he explains. Read more...

Why are programs with names like “Team builders” only for business students? by Peg Tittle. While reading about our university’s participation in Students in Free Enterprise, or SIFE (recently renamed Enactus), it occured to me to wonder why such an endeavour is undertaken only by business students. The program is described as one in which “leaders in business and higher education to mobilize university students to make a difference in their communities while developing the skills to become socially responsible business leaders” (from Wikipedia).
Consider the projects listed below – and then imagine the alternatives:
“Team Builders” led team-building exercises during a weekend program at the YMCA. Imagine if sociology students tried team-building. I think it might be quite different than the exercises undertaken by business students.
“Junior Tycoons” were high school students presented with a basic business plan. Why not present “Junior Diplomats” with a plan for redesigning recess, based on insights from political science, history, and psychology?
“Budgeting for Mental Health Patients.” How about "Philosophy for Mental Health Patients"?
Enactus projects, which train students to apply their knowledge outside academia and also increase the visibility of business in the outside world, probably contribute to the strangle-hold that business activities and business interests have on the world. Read more...

By Scott McLemee. A scholar committed to the digital humanities once summed up his long-term strategy for winning their acceptance with a terse, sardonic comment. “We will advance,” he said, “funeral by funeral.” It's the kind of sentiment that's often felt, but seldom so well expressed -- or so brutally.
But assuming that time is on digital culture’s side also tempts fate. The humanities include bodies of knowledge that have developed over periods ranging from a decade to a couple of millennia and more. Digital technologies can emerge and eclipse one another in the time it takes to write a single monograph. The wisdom of reorganizing one around the other is at least questionable. A paper in the December issue of Literary & Linguistic Computing called “Toward Modeling the Social Edition: An Approach to Understanding the Electronic Scholarly Edition in the Context of New and Emerging Social Media” manages to be forward-looking but not triumphalistic. Read more...

ADRIAN, Mich. — They're the places you think of when you think of "college" – leafy campuses, small classes, small towns. Liberal arts colleges are where students ponder life's big questions, and learn to think en route to successful careers and richer lives, if not always to the best-paying first jobs.
But today's increasingly career-focused students mostly aren't buying the idea that a liberal arts education is good value, and many small liberal arts colleges are struggling. The survivors are shedding their liberal arts identity, if not the label. A study published earlier this year found that of 212 such institutions identified in 1990, only 130 still meet the criteria of a "true liberal arts college." Most that fell off the list remained in business, but had shifted toward a pre-professional curriculum.
These distinctively American institutions – educating at most 2 percent of college students but punching far above their weight in accomplished graduates – can't turn back the clock. Read more...

2012 Call for Nominations: European Award for Excellence in Teaching in the Social Sciences and Humanities
Central European University is pleased to announce the second annual European Award for Excellence in Teaching in the Social Sciences and Humanities.  This pioneering award, first announced in 2011 on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of Central European University, honors academics in the social sciences and humanities who teach at higher education institutions in countries of the European Higher Education Area.
With both teaching and research at the core of its mission, Central European University is committed to promoting excellence in teaching and the advancement of the social sciences and humanities. The European Award for Excellence in Teaching underscores this commitment, and it aims further to contribute to recent efforts in higher education on the European level that focus on the importance of teaching and learning.
Last year in response to the announcement of the 2012 inaugural Award, CEU received nominations from over ten European countries in support of faculty whose work spanned a wide range of academic areas.  High interest in the project, an impressive group of finalists, and overall positive feedback confirmed the significance and need for continued efforts in this area.  We are extremely pleased, therefore, to announce the second annual European Award for Excellence in Teaching.
Background of the Award
The original idea to initiate such an Award stemmed from an observation that in recent years, a strong emphasis has been placed at the European level on research in higher education. Research-related activities and achievements have attracted particular attention and recognition, also illustrated by the creation of European funding programs and awards for research.  This emphasis has been particularly severe in the social sciences and humanities. It was reflected, moreover, in the absence, until recently, of major systematic initiatives at the European level to recognize the value of teaching.
Recently, however, there have been strong indications that policy makers in Europe are starting to realize that teaching could, should and does play an important role in higher education. This recognizes that, in conjunction with research, teaching in support of student knowledge construction within and across disciplines, general education, and professional training at the higher education level have an important role to play in a “knowledge society.”
Although a number of universities offer their own teaching awards and various professional and other associations offer prizes within subject areas, prior to the establishment of the European Award for Excellence in Teaching in the Social Sciences and Humanities, there appeared to be no significant pan-European rewards for teaching excellence in higher education in the social sciences and humanities. The European Award was designed to address this need: it is intended both to promote better teaching and to enhance recognition of the importance of teaching throughout Europe.
Nominations for the European Award for Excellence in Teaching in the Social Sciences and Humanities will be accepted until January 31, 2013. Nominations should be sent electronically to: TeachingAward@ceu.hu.

By Colleen Flaherty. Graduate education in the humanities is in crisis. Michael Bérubé, president of the Modern Language Association and director of the Institute for Arts and Humanities at Pennsylvania State University, acknowledged that it isn’t exactly news, but he wanted to say it anyway Thursday during a speech on the topic at the annual meeting of the Council of Graduate Schools.
“It’s just bad,” he said. “[It’s] like a seamless garment of crisis; pull on any one thread and the entire thing unravels.”
Although the troubles are easy to diagnose, prescribing a better future for humanities graduate students and Ph.D.s is much harder. Questions about attrition and time to degree raise questions about curriculums and size of programs, which in turn raise questions about the purpose of those programs and graduate career trajectories. Those questions then fall on the state of the academic job market. In short, Bérubé said, “There’s no way to talk about the future of education in the humanities without talking about everything else in the humanities.” Read more...

By Karin A. Wurst. The recent conversations on the future of the humanities degree -- most prominently at the Annual Convention of the Modern Language Association by its then-president, Russell Berman -- are encouraging steps in addressing the challenges. The position paper that Berman helped write outlines some meaningful first steps to address the time-to-degree issue, for example, that will need to be a driver for change. The recent article “The 5-Year Humanities Ph.D.” on Inside Higher Ed reiterates Stanford’s desire to continue fostering the debate with an emphasis on shortening time to degree for humanities Ph.D.s.
The current contribution seeks to expand the conversation and offer some concrete ideas for desirable changes beyond the time-to-degree issue. In particular, some funding changes -- coupled with restructuring programs so that the summers are utilized better and students have an expectation of an impactful year-around engagement -- need to take place. In addition, in order to open more avenues for employment, we may have to provide a similar co-curriculum as we do on the undergraduate level, one that produces T-shaped Ph.D.s aware and confident not only of their disciplinary depth, but also of their broader transferable skill set. Read more...

The EQF is a common European reference framework which links countries' qualifications systems together, acting as a translation device to make qualifications more readable and understandable across different countries and systems in Europe. In this context, Tuning could bridge the European Qualification Framework (EQF) for Life Long Learning (LLL) and the Qualification Framework (QF) for the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) as well as bridging the subject area level and the general descriptors of both qualification frameworks. What is really required now are frameworks which offer descriptors and reference points at mediate level, more general than at subject area level and more precise than at the level of the EQF for LLL and the QF for the EHEA (the Dublin descriptors).
The project seeks to develop a credit based sectoral qualification framework for the sector/domain of the Social Sciences. The framework is intended to cover the levels 3 to 8 of the European Qualification Framework (EQF) for Life Long Learning (LLL). The achievement of such a framework as an intermediate level between the subject area level and the general level of the EQF will facilitate the recognition of prior (formal, informal and non formal) learning by developing clear reference points. It will also contribute to the relationship of higher and general education and vocational education and training. A sector or domain is understood here as a combination of related fields of study which is based on more or less comparable learning profiles.
Description
The project will cover and will be based on the following two groups of subject areas. A first group for which learning outcomes/competences based descriptors and reference points have been developed in the framework of the Tuning and Thematic network projects: Business, European Studies, Education Sciences, Occupational Therapy and Social Work. A second group for which it is thought absolutely necessary to develop descriptors and reference points as being key fields in the Social Sciences domain: Law, Psychology and International Relations. The 40 institutions involved in the second group will be selected on the basis of an Open Call. Particular attention will be given to the relation between secondary general education on the one hand and vocational education and training and higher education on the other hand by identifying and comparing recognition procedures as well as standard pathways for admission to higher education programmes. The project builds on the results of the Erasmus, Tempus and Alfa TUNING projects, which have played a major role in promoting the learning outcomes/competence approach in higher education. The credit part of the framework will be based on ECTS taking into account the work that has been accomplished as part of the ECVET initiative.
Objectives
The main objective of the project is to develop a European credit based sectoral qualification framework covering the levels 3 to 8 of the European Qualification Framework (EQF) for Life Long Learning (LLL) on the basis of the outputs of the TUNING project, that is cycle level descriptors and reference points for a range of subject areas. The development of such a framework, covering secondary level and higher education at sectoral level will be a major step forward and will prove to be extremely useful for the recognition of prior learning (formal, non formal and informal). The intention is to develop also more clarity about credit ranges regarding the levels 3 to 5.
The most important objectives are the following:
    identification of (main) subject areas not covered by the Tuning project so far. Establishment of subject area based working groups for these fields. Initiating preparation of key features and cycle (level) descriptors for these subject areas;
    mapping of secondary general education and vocational education and training level from the perspective of the sector as well as for each subject area involved. Identification of communalities and differences at national level;
    identification of communalities and differences at sectoral as well as at subject area level at European level;
    preparation of cycle descriptors for the levels 3, 4 and possibly 5 at subject area as well as at sectoral level;
    identification of entrance and exit points as well as entrance levels at levels 3 and 4 and possibly 5 on the basis of different learning routes taken;
    identification of (ECTS) credit ranges for the levels 3 to 5 as well as exploration of the link to the European Credit system for Vocational Education and Training (ECVET) initiative;
    identification of communalities and differences between the already prepared cycle (level) descriptors for the first, second, third level, i.e. the levels 6 to 8 of the EQF for LLL;
    preparation of sectoral cycle / level descriptors. These descriptors should be written in such a way that both the Dublin descriptors and the descriptors of the EQF for LLL are covered;
    identification of communalities between the different Tuning sectoral frameworks: sector by sector as well as all sectors concerned;
    identification of suggestions for fine tuning and bridging of the Bologna (Dublin) descriptors and the descriptors of the EQF for LLL.

The HUMART project is a break through initiative to identify common denominators in the academic sectors/domains of Humanities and the Arts. The project is implemented in the context of the Bologna Process, the creation of one European Qualifications Framework and the subject area reference points developed by Tuning. Furthermore the project seeks to create European wide transparency with regard to the relation between higher education and secondary and vocational education and training. This will allow for improved recognition of formal, informal and non formal learning against clear internationally established reference points.
At present the Higher Education sector is working with the two existing European Qualifications Frameworks.A Qualifications Framework is a common reference framework which links countries' qualifications systems, acting as a translation device to make qualifications more readable and understandable across different countries and systems in Europe. The Tuning HUMART project plans to bridge the European Qualifications Framework (EQF) for Life Long Learning (LLL) and the Qualifications Framework (QF) for the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) at the level of academic sectors/domains.
A sector or domain is understood here as a combination of related fields of study which is based on more or less comparable learning profiles. Point of departure in this exercise are the reference points at subject area level as developed in the Tuning projects. The HUMART project seeks to develop a credit based sectoral qualifications framework to cover the levels 3 to 8 of the European Qualification Framework (EQF) for Life Long Learning (LLL). The work will build on a comparable project for the field of Social Sciences which has been completed in the year 2010.
Objectives
SQF HUMART Final Report 2010-2011
SQFs for the Creative and Performing Disciplines and the Humanities
Reference Points for the Design and Delivery of Degree Programmes in Art History
Reference Points for the Design and Delivery of Degree Programmes in Linguistics
Reference Points for the Design and Delivery of Degree Programmes in Literary Studies
Reference Points for the Design and Delivery of Degree Programmes in Theology and Religious Studies
ECTS and ECVET: Comparisons and Contrasts
EQF Level Descriptors Architecture
EQF Level Descriptors Art History
EQF Level Descriptors Visual and Performing Arts
EQF Level Descriptors History
EQF Level Descriptors Linguistics
EQF Level Descriptors Literary Studies
EQF Level Descriptors Music
EQF Level Descriptors Theology and Religious Studies.

SQF Humanities and Arts
The HUMART project is a break through initiative to identify common denominators in the academic sectors/domains of Humanities and the Arts. The project is implemented in the context of the Bologna Process, the creation of one European Qualifications Framework and the subject area reference points developed by Tuning. Furthermore the project seeks to create European wide transparency with regard to the relation between higher education and secondary and vocational education and training. This will allow for improved recognition of formal, informal and non formal learning against clear internationally established reference points.
At present the Higher Education sector is working with the two existing European Qualifications Frameworks.A Qualifications Framework is a common reference framework which links countries' qualifications systems, acting as a translation device to make qualifications more readable and understandable across different countries and systems in Europe. The Tuning HUMART project plans to bridge the European Qualifications Framework (EQF) for Life Long Learning (LLL) and the Qualifications Framework (QF) for the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) at the level of academic sectors/domains.
A sector or domain is understood here as a combination of related fields of study which is based on more or less comparable learning profiles. Point of departure in this exercise are the reference points at subject area level as developed in the Tuning projects. The HUMART project seeks to develop a credit based sectoral qualifications framework to cover the levels 3 to 8 of the European Qualification Framework (EQF) for Life Long Learning (LLL). The work will build on a comparable project for the field of Social Sciences which has been completed in the year 2010.
HUMART outcomes
The outcomes of the SQF Humanities and Arts (HUMART) project are now available on the website. You are welcome to comment on the documents. Download SQF HUMART Final Report.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The HUMART project is a break through initiative to identify common denominators in the academic sectors/domains of Humanities and the Arts. The project has been implemented in the context of the Bologna Process, the creation of a European Qualifications Framework and the subject area reference points developed by Tuning. Furthermore the project has sought to create European wide transparency with regard to the relation between higher education and secondary and vocational education and training. This should facilitate recognition of formal, informal and non- formal learning against clear internationally established reference points and descriptors. At present the Higher Education sector is working with the two existing European Qualifications Frameworks. A Qualifications Framework is a common reference framework which links countries' qualifications systems, acting as a translation device to make qualifications more readable and understandable across different countries and systems in Europe. The Tuning HUMART project has focused on the development of Sectoral Qualifications Frameworks for the Humanities and for the Performing and Creative Disciplines. These frameworks should help in the bridging of the European Qualifications Framework (EQF) for Life Long Learning (LLL) and the Qualifications Framework (QF) for the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) at the level of academic sectors/domains.
A sector or domain is understood here as a combination of related fields of study which is based on more or less comparable learning profiles. The HUMART project has sought to develop a credit based Sectoral Qualifications Framework to cover the levels 4 to 8 of the European Qualifications Framework (EQF) for Life Long Learning (LLL). The work has built on a comparable project for the field of Social Sciences which was completed in the year 2010.
The objectives and outcomes of the SQF HUMART for Humanities and Arts have been established by using the strategy of reflection, debate and consultation in the form of working groups, a method which has proven to be successful in the Tuning I to IV projects (2000 - 2009). Close cooperation with and consultation of experts in the field of non-formal and informal learning at both national and international level were also applied. This cooperation and consultation has been of relevance in particular for mapping secondary formal, informal and non-formal level education.
The project was based on 9 subject area working groups reflecting a range of disciplines in the Humanities, that is History, Art History, Linguistics, Literary studies, Theology and Religious Studies and disciplines reflecting the Creative and Performing Disciplines, that is Art and Design, Dance and Theatre, Music and Architecture. The first four groups were asked to develop reference points/descriptors for their subject area. The other five groups had previously developed reference points/descriptors for their subject area based on the Dublin Descriptors and they were asked to convert them into EQF for LLL based ones. The major successful outcomes of the project are two Sectoral Frameworks and the nine subject-area based frameworks with descriptors based on the EQF for LLL. It is particularly underlined that the two SQFs use a methodology which is a development and improvement on the one that was used in the previous Tuning SQF for the Social Sciences. In addition to using the three EQF categories on the ‘horizontal’ plane, the SQFs vitally introduce a number of ‘dimensions’ in the vertical plane. This adds substantially to the readability of the frameworks. More information can be found on http://www.unideusto.org/tuningeu/ under SQF Humanities and Arts.
OUTCOME 5. SUGGESTIONS FOR FINE TUNING AND BRIDGING OF THE BOLOGNA (DUBLIN) DESCRIPTORS AND THE DESCRIPTORS OF THE EQF FOR LLL
The approach taken to the categorisation of Learning Outcomes by the QF EHEA in the Dublin Descriptors and by the EQF LLL in its descriptors of the eight levels of learning is not the same, although both relate closely to Bloom’s taxonomy. The Dublin Descriptors have been drawn up on a five categories of LOs namely:
a. Knowledge and Skills
b. Applying knowledge and understanding
c. Making judgments
d. Communication skills
e. Learning Skills.
The EQF descriptors are based on a tripartite division of learning outcomes each of which is closely defined as follows:
a. ‘Knowledge’ means the outcome of the assimilation of information through learning. Knowledge is the body of facts, principles, theories and practices that is related to a field of study or work. In the EQF, knowledge is described as theoretical and/or factual;
b. ‘Skills’ means the ability to apply knowledge and use know-how to complete tasks and solve problems. In the EQF, skills are described as cognitive (use of logical, intuitive and creative thinking) and practical (involving manual dexterity and the use of methods, materials, tools and instruments);
c. ‘Competence’ means the proven ability to use knowledge, skills and personal, social and/or methodological abilities, in work or study situations and in professional and/or personal development. In the EQF, competence is described in terms of responsibility and autonomy.
This difference of approach has inevitably led to serious questions being raised about the degree of compatibility between the two learning frameworks, since compatibility cannot be taken for granted. Several attempts have been made to assess the relationship between the two of which this HUMART project is the latest. Mention may be here of three such previous attempts, the published results of which are all readily available on the internet.
The first is the result of the BE-TWIN project, entitled ECVET-ECTS: Building Bridges and Overcoming Differences, published in July 2010. This has a very positive attitude to the compatibility of the two systems.
The second is the results of the DOCET project conducted as part of the Erasmus Mundus Programme, entitled EQF-CDIO: a reference model for engineering education, published in the autumn of 2010. Although generally positive in is approach to the question of the compatibility of the two learning framework, this second report raised some doubts about the strict degree of coincidence between EQF learning levels 5 to 8, on the one hand, and the four Bologna cycles, on the other hand.
The third project is that of Tuning which produced in October 2010 its report on Tuning SQF for the Social Sciences. This was, as previously discussed earlier in this report, the first attempt to produce a set of sectoral learning outcomes on the EQF model for all programmes in the Social Sciences offered in HEIs. A clear methodology and procedure was developed for producing this table of learning outcomes for each of levels 4 to 8. Even if some members of the project initially felt some doubt, in a few cases even serious doubt, as to the degree of coincidence between the EQF levels and the Bologna cycles, the outcome of this exercise was an undoubted success.
On the basis of the Tuning SQF for the Social Sciences, Tuning HUMART has taken a significant step further. Its approach in the construction of the sectoral tables has been to use a grid which can be read, with greater clarity, in both planes. The first of these two planes is the ‘horizontal’ plane represented by the three categories of the EQF framework. The second plane is based on the more ‘progressive’ approach of the Dublin Descriptors, and constitutes sectoral ‘dimensions’ which are displayed in the vertical plane. This means that the resultant tables are more easily readable in both planes. The differences between the two sectors has resulted in lists of these vertical dimensions which varied somewhat even if there is a great degree of overlap. For the Humanities, these categories for each of levels 4, 6, 7 and 8 are as follows:
• The Human Being
• Cultures and Societies
• Texts and Contexts
• Theories and Concepts
• Interdisciplinarity
• Communication
• Initiative and Creativity
• Professional Development
For the Creative and Performing Disciplines for each of levels 4, 6 7 and 8 these dimensions are as follows:
• Making Performing, Designing, Conceptualising, Creation (skills/knowledge)
• Re-thinking, Considering and interpreting the Human (competences)
• Experimenting, innovating and Researching (skills/knowledge)
• Theories histories and Cultures (knowledge)
• Technical, environmental and Contextual issues (skills/knowledge)
• Communication, Collaboration and Interdisciplinarity (skills/competence)
• Initiative & Enterprise (skills/competence). Download SQF HUMART Final Report.