Bologna-Office 3rd Forum European Higher Education
Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
READER
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
1
INTRODUCTION
This Reader has been prepared for the 3rd Forum European Higher Education Area organised by the
Bologna-Office of the University of Vienna. It compiles extracts of the most important documents on
the nature and design of doctoral studies adopted at both national and European level. Starting with
the most up-to-date documents, the Reader covers the period from the Berlin Communiqué in 2003,
when the third cycle was first addressed in the Bologna context, to the most recent Ministerial
Communiqué adopted in London in May, 2007. It furthermore contains a short overview of the main
regulations on doctoral studies as stipulated by Austrian law.
All original documents can be found on our website http://bologna.univie.ac.at/. Alternatively you
may also follow the links provided throughout the document or listed at the end of the Reader.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
“Towards the European Higher Education Area: responding to challenges in a
globalised world”
Communiqué of the Conference of European Ministers Responsible for Higher Education,
London, 18 May 2007
p. 3
“Conclusions of the EUA Report on Doctoral Programmes”
EUA, March 2007
p.4
“Doctoral Programmes in Europe”
BFUG Report, Brussels, 20 January 2007
p. 7
“Matching Ambition with Responsibilities and Resources”
Final Conclusions - Preparing Recommendations for the London Communiqué, Bologna
Seminar on Doctoral Programmes, Nice, 7-9 December 2006
p. 17
„Stellungnahme der Österreichischen Rektorenkonferenz zur internationalen
Diskussion über verschiedene Doktoratsformen“
20. November 2006 (GERMAN)
p. 24
“Doctoral Programmes for the European Knowledge Society”
Report on the EUA Doctoral Programmes Project 2004-2005
p. 27
“The European Higher Education Area - Achieving the Goals”
Communiqué of the Conference of European Ministers Responsible for Higher Education,
Bergen, 19-20 May 2005
p. 31
“Conclusions and Recommendations”
Bologna Seminar on “Doctoral Programmes for the European Knowledge Society”, Salzburg,
3-5 February 2005
p. 32
„Das Doktoratsstudium in Österreich. Nationale Positionierung im Kontext
europäischer Entwicklungen“
Gemeinsames Positionspapier des bm:bwk und der ÖRK, Wien, Jänner 2005 (GERMAN)
p. 34
“Realising the European Higher Education Area”
Communiqué of the Conference of Ministers responsible for Higher Education, Berlin, 19
September 2003
p. 37
Austrian law concerning the third cycle (GERMAN) p. 38
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Towards the European Higher Education Area: responding to challenges in a globalised world”
Communiqué of the Conference of European Ministers Responsible for Higher Education, London, 18 May 2007
3
“Towards the European Higher Education Area: responding to challenges in a globalised world” Communiqué of the Conference of European Ministers Responsible for Higher Education, London, 18 May 2007 http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/documents/
Doctoral candidates
2.15 Closer alignment of the EHEA with the European Research Area (ERA) remains an important
objective. We recognise the value of developing and maintaining a wide variety of doctoral
programmes linked to the overarching qualifications framework for the EHEA, whilst avoiding
overregulation. At the same time, we appreciate that enhancing provision in the third cycle and
improving the status, career prospects and funding for early stage researchers are essential
preconditions for meeting Europe’s objectives of strengthening research capacity and improving the
quality and competitiveness of European higher education.
2.16 We therefore invite our HEIs to reinforce their efforts to embed doctoral programmes in
institutional strategies and policies, and to develop appropriate career paths and opportunities for
doctoral candidates and early stage researchers.
2.17 We invite EUA to continue to support the sharing of experience among HEIs on the range of
innovative doctoral programmes that are emerging across Europe as well as on other crucial issues
such as transparent access arrangements, supervision and assessment procedures, the development of
transferable skills and ways of enhancing employability. We will look for appropriate opportunities to
encourage greater exchange of information on funding and other issues between our Governments as
well as with other research funding bodies.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Conclusions of the EUA Report on Doctoral Programmes”
EUA, March 2007
4
“Conclusions of the EUA Report on Doctoral Programmes” EUA, March 2007 http://www.eua.be/index.php?id=128
The Bergen Ministerial Communiqué (May 2005) gave a mandate to the European University Association to prepare a report on the further development of doctoral programmes to be presented to Ministers in 2007. 1. EUA’s 10 Salzburg Principles on Doctoral Programmes (February 2005) that provided the basis for
the Bergen Communiqué text have proved invaluable in setting the scene for the discussions of the last
two years and should continue to provide the broad framework for discussion of doctoral programmes
in Europe.
2. The provision of high quality doctoral programmes and better career opportunities for young
researchers is an essential precondition in meeting Europe’s objectives in terms of strengthening
research capacity and improving the quality and competitiveness of European higher education
internationally. It is therefore crucial for governments and universities to support the further
development of structured doctoral programmes and to seek to improve the status, career prospects
and funding of early stage researchers. As doctoral programmes constitute the key link between the
European Higher Education and Research Areas this requires the attention of both Ministers of Higher
Education working together in the Bologna Process and the necessary coordination with other
responsible Ministries and government agencies at national and European level.
3. The unique character of the third cycle driven by its core component, the advancement of knowledge
through research, needs to be recognized within the Bologna process; at the same time the
implementation of the three Bologna cycles should be seen as a whole, and the inclusion of a research
component as well as of transferable skills development ensured also in the first and second cycles.
4. Universities accept their responsibility for embedding doctoral programmes in institutional
strategies and policies. This involves establishing the appropriate organisational structures in the form
of doctoral, research or graduate schools with effective administration, leadership, and specific
funding that will promote high quality, internationally oriented and networked doctoral programmes.
5. A range of innovative doctoral programmes are emerging across Europe in response to the demands
of a rapidly evolving labour market. These include programmes known as “professional doctorates“, or
practice related doctorates, that focus on embedding research in a reflective manner into another
professional practice, increased university-industry cooperation and more European and international
cooperation. These are new developments for most countries and universities across Europe. Further
discussion of these developments is needed, as well as continued exchange of experience among
universities on questions such as supervision and assessment procedures and the development of
transferable skills.
6. Together with public authorities and other partners at national and European level universities
share a responsibility for creating the appropriate career paths and opportunities for doctoral
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Conclusions of the EUA Report on Doctoral Programmes”
EUA, March 2007
5
candidates and early stage researchers. This involves providing the appropriate working conditions,
rights and career prospects for young researchers, both in academia and in a range of other sectors.
7. Based upon an EUA survey of doctoral programmes to which 36 BFUG governments responded
attention is drawn to the role of governments and other competent authorities in ensuring that:
• funding for doctoral candidates is stable, covers the full period of the doctoral programme, and
provides sufficient means to live and work in decent conditions;
• funding is sufficiently attractive to encourage suitably-qualified candidates from lower income
groups, as well as sufficiently flexible to support the needs of part time students over a longer
period of study.
8. The EUA survey of national situations with BFUG countries also demonstrates a great diversity in
existing funding channels, mechanisms and modes. As with organizational types, it is to be expected
that diversity in funding sources, channels, mechanisms and modes will become an irreversible trend.
Thus, in order to create a shared vision of doctoral education within the European Higher Education
Area that is attractive and competitive on a global scale:
• more information on funding mechanisms and funding levels of doctoral candidates and
doctoral programmes/schools must be made available;
• increased consultation and co-ordination among the diverse modes and funding bodies
(government ministries, funding councils and other funding bodies) at regional, national and
European level will be increasingly important to ensure optimum funding for the candidate,
and overall quality in doctoral education and training.
9. The European University Association is committed to continuing this debate with its member
universities and other partners, and to providing the necessary support to its members, in particular
through the establishment of a permanent framework for the further development, cooperation and
exchange of good practice between doctoral programmes and doctoral schools across Europe’s
universities.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Doctoral Programmes in Europe” BFUG Report, Brussels, 20 January 2007
6
“Doctoral Programmes in Europe” BFUG Report, Brussels, 20 January 2007 http://bologna.univie.ac.at/index.php?id=16256
IV. The Role of Universities
Universities have the main responsibility for the development of high quality doctoral programmes.
Providing training in and through research is one of their core tasks, both to prepare young
researchers for careers in academia but also increasingly to be able to play a significant role in other
areas of society, be it in the public sector or other research agencies, in industry, commerce or the
service sector. This requires autonomous institutions able to act responsibly, and develop and
implement institutional strategies for doctoral programmes in a number of different areas.
1. Embedding in institutional strategies and policies: organisational structures
One of the key questions being debated in institutions across Europe, and much discussed during the
present project (cf Annex 3) relates to the choice of structures within the institution best suited to
providing high quality programmes. Organisational structures chosen must demonstrate added value
for the institution and for doctoral candidates, in particular in seeking to counteract the isolation of the
early stage researcher from other disciplines, or from the larger peer group, or the larger scientific
community; to improve transparency, quality, and admission and assessment procedures; create
synergies regarding transferable skills development.
Different solutions may be appropriate to different contexts and the choice of structure is a matter for
each institution, based upon the specific institutional aims which these structures are supposed to
meet.
• Recent developments and an analysis of practice across Europe points to the emergence of
doctoral / graduate/ or research schools. The EUA TRENDS V Report (2006) 3 reports
that 30% of European higher education institutions surveyed say they have now established
some kind of doctoral, graduate or research school. This question was also asked in the survey
of Bologna Process member countries carried out specifically for this project4. Out of the 36
countries that responded, 16 countries reported that their institutions have introduced
doctoral, graduate or research schools, alongside existing models such as traditional individual
training or ‘stand alone’ structured doctoral programmes (Table 1).
The responses thus show an increasing trend towards the development of structured programmes and
doctoral/ graduate/ or research schools in addition to individual training. However, a mix of different
organisational types seems to be common practice in most countries. This reflects the need to achieve
a critical mass of doctoral candidates in many cases, but also the existence of disciplinary differences
that need to be taken into consideration in the organisation of doctoral training. (…)
A doctoral, or graduate, or research school is an independent organisational unit with effective
administration, strong leadership and specific funding supporting this structure.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Doctoral Programmes in Europe” BFUG Report, Brussels, 20 January 2007
7
An analysis of trends across Europe shows two main organisational models emerging as vehicles for
promoting high quality, internationally oriented and networked doctoral/research/graduate schools:
• Graduate school – an organisational structure that includes doctoral candidates and often also
Master students. It provides administrative, development and transferable skills development
support, organises admission, courses and seminars, and takes responsibility for quality
assurance.
• Doctoral/ Research school – an organisational structure that includes only doctoral students.
It may be organised around a particular discipline, research theme or a cross-disciplinary
research area and/ or it is focused on creating a research group/ network and is project-
driven. It may involve one institution or several institutions and organise co-operation among
them.
These models are not mutually exclusive and often have shared characteristics. Countries or
institutions may adopt both models within their systems and/or structures.
The advantages and added value of doctoral/ graduate/ research schools may be summarised as
follows:
- Define a mission or vision shared by all partners that facilitates the process of turning doctoral
candidates into excellent researchers
- Provide a stimulating research environment and promote cooperation across disciplines
- Provide a clear administrative structure for doctoral programmes, candidates and supervisors, and
offering a clear profile and status for doctoral candidates
- Ensure critical mass and help to overcome the isolation of young researchers
- Bring junior and senior researchers together
- Support and facilitate the task of supervising candidates and the role of supervisors
- Organise admission with transparent rules and regulations
- Provide teaching and transferable skills training
- Provide enhanced career development opportunities, including advice on funding opportunities
(scholarships, projects)
- Guarantee quality assurance and monitoring
- Provide a framework allowing the development of codes of practice, procedures and mechanisms
within the university structure and act as a an independent arbitrator or ombudsman where necessary
- Enhance opportunities for mobility, international collaboration and inter-institutional cooperation
2. Access and Admissions
In a fast-changing environment, it is essential to maintain flexibility in admissions to doctoral
programmes, and full institutional autonomy: diversity of institutional missions and context, and the
growing importance of lifelong learning mean that there are good reasons for different access
requirements in different institutions and for different programmes provided fairness, transparency
and objectivity is ensured.
The Bologna commitment that the second cycle gives access (= right to be considered for admission) to
the third cycle should be maintained, but access to the third cycle should not be restricted to this route.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Doctoral Programmes in Europe” BFUG Report, Brussels, 20 January 2007
8
Higher Education Institutions need to pay greater attention to the social dimension of the third cycle.
Equality of access to the third cycle is a major concern, whether inequality derives from gender,
ethnicity, social or other disadvantage.
3. Supervision and assessment
The question of supervision, monitoring and assessment of doctoral researchers has been a major
topic of discussion for universities in the course of this project. Already an important issue in 2005,
and included in the Salzburg principles, it is crucial that discussion continues, and that universities are
encouraged and supported in the development and dissemination of good practices in the
management of research degrees. Not only recent debates but also the publication of several national
evaluation reports shows that there is a great need to develop new supervision practices in doctoral
training.
Arrangements need to be developed based upon a transparent contractual framework of shared
responsibilities between doctoral candidates, supervisors and the institution, and, where appropriate
other partners as mentioned in the Salzburg Principles. Attention should be paid in particular to
ensuring: multiple supervision arrangements, the continuous professional skills development of
academic staff, and performance reviews of supervisors. Multiple supervision arrangements should be
encouraged also at international level through tutoring and co-tutoring by supervisors from academic
and research institutions in different European countries.
The importance of ensuring good supervision needs to be properly recognised as a task of staff
supervising doctoral candidates, should be included in their workload and task descriptions, and thus
also taken into consideration in academic career structures and decisions on promotion. Some
universities report that it is useful to develop workload models to ensure that a supervisor dedicates
enough time in support of each doctoral candidate.
As doctoral programmes change in response to changes in the labour market, thus also the role of the
supervisor. This has led to a growing awareness of the importance of ensuring professional skills
development for supervisors. This discussion is, however, in its early stages and has not yet begun in
many European countries. The UK successfully introduced professional skills development of
supervisors in 2004 on the basis of a Code of Practice developed specifically for research programmes
by the UK Quality Assurance Agency. Such training is usually organised in an informal way, as one-
day-out meetings, based on case studies, discussions, sharing of good practices and experience.
Innovative ways of motivating supervisors to introduce effective and high quality practices of
supervision also include practices such as annual awards/incentives for the best supervisors.
The final stage of the doctorate, i.e. the assessment of the thesis, is crucial, and assessment procedures
should be based on objective and transparent criteria. Due recognition should be given to the original
research contribution made by the doctoral candidate. Assessment should be done by an expert
university committee with external representation, preferably chosen at international level. The impact
of the supervisor on the outcome of the process should be limited. This does not preclude participation
of the supervisor in the examining body, especially when this is a large body, or when the thesis
defence is public. Models of organisation of the assessment of the thesis and the composition of the
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Doctoral Programmes in Europe” BFUG Report, Brussels, 20 January 2007
9
committee differ significantly from country to country and further discussion at European level is
needed.
4. Transferable skills development
Transferable skills development should be an integral part of first, second and third cycle programmes.
The main goal at the level of the third cycle should be to raise awareness among doctoral candidates of
the importance of both recognising and enhancing the skills that they develop and acquire through
research, as a means of improving their employment prospects both in academia and on the wider
labour market.
Courses should be offered in the context of whatever overarching institutional support structures are
in place at doctoral level. Training can be organised in different ways ranging from traditional courses
and lectures to more student-centered methods, especially through learning by doing at institutional,
inter-institutional and international summer schools or through specialised institutional or inter-
institutional support and personal development centres, as offered in the UK by the UK GRAD
programmes and the UK Council on Graduate Education. An important element of transferable skills
development is bringing together doctoral candidates from different disciplines and different levels (1-
3 year) to encourage interdisciplinary dialogue and foster creative thinking and innovation.
Ensuring that adequate funding is devoted to transferable skills development is crucial. It is likewise
important to ensure that reference to transferable skills development is embedded in institutional
quality assessment procedures. Academic staff involved in skills development should include both
academics that are active in research and understand the need to teach other skills, and external
consultants (e.g. industry, companies). Teaching transferable skills should be recognised in evaluation
and promotion of academic staff involved.
5. Duration
Full time doctoral programmes are usually of 3 – 4 years´ duration. Part time studies take longer. In
most countries time to degree (TTD) tends to be longer than the average duration of funding for
doctoral candidates and programmes. This is an important issue in relation to the funding of doctoral
programmes. It will become increasing important for universities to monitor carefully the
development of time to degree for doctoral candidates. Experience in North America suggests that this
can be done most successfully within the graduate or research school structure.
6. Researcher careers
Universities, together with public authorities in Europe, share a collective responsibility for promoting
attractive research careers and career perspectives for doctoral and postdoctoral researchers (cf also
Section….). This should be done in collaboration with partners outside academia in order to facilitate
the development of clear career paths inside and outside academia, and between academia and other
sectors of employment. It is also the responsibility of universities to create attractive conditions for
research, taking account of the European Researchers’ Charter & the Code of Conduct for the
Recruitment of Researchers.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Doctoral Programmes in Europe” BFUG Report, Brussels, 20 January 2007
10
7. Including doctoral programmes in institutional strategies for enhancing
Internationalisation
Doctoral programmes are a key component of the discussion on European higher education in a global
context, while at institutional level, attracting the best doctoral candidates from all over the world,
encouraging mobility within doctoral programmes and supporting European and international joint
doctoral programmes and co-tutelle arrangements, are central to the development of any international
strategy. Universities are encouraged to enhance their efforts to support mobility at doctoral level
within the framework of inter-institutional collaboration as an element of their broader international
strategy. International mobility, including transsectoral and transdisciplinary mobility should be
recognised as having an added value for the career development of early stage researchers.
For some institutions and indeed, some smaller countries, mobility may also be a means of training
their own young researchers in disciplines and transdisciplinary research areas where a critical mass of
doctoral candidates, or capacities or infrastructure does not exist or is not available at home.
Higher education institutions, and public authorities at national and European level, should offer
funding instruments facilitating the mobility of doctoral candidates from all 45 Bologna countries, and
with the objective of increasing mobility. Legal, administrative and social obstacles, for example
concerning visas, work permits and social security issues should be addressed by all partners in the
process.
Finally increasing internationalisation inside universities, especially at doctoral level is also important,
and should not be forgotten. Doctoral training is per se international in nature and sufficient
opportunities should be provided for doctoral candidates to engage internationally. This can be done,
for example, through the recruitment of more international staff; the organisation of international
workshops, conferences and summer schools; the development of more European and international
joint doctoral programmes and co-tutelle arrangements. The use of new technologies, such as using
teleconferences, e-learning etc. should also be used to foster the internationalisation of doctoral
programmes.
V. New Developments in doctoral programmes
A range of innovative doctorate programmes are emerging to respond to the changing demands of a
fast-evolving labour market. Employability of doctoral candidates within and outside academic
institutions, as well as individual and societal needs for lifelong education and training, have acted as a
catalyst to the development of new programmes, including professional doctorates, more university -
industrial collaboration based doctorates and increased European and international cooperation, often
leading to joint or European doctorates. Diversity of doctoral programmes and doctorates reflects the
increasingly diversity of the European Higher Education landscape in which higher education
institutions have the autonomy to develop their own missions and profiles and thus their own
priorities in terms of programmes and research priorities.
Nevertheless, all the discussion on different new developments has led to the consensus that there
should be no doctorate without original research and that all awards described as doctorates (no
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Doctoral Programmes in Europe” BFUG Report, Brussels, 20 January 2007
11
matter what their type or form) should be based on a core of processes and outcomes. Original
research has to remain the main component of all doctorates.
Core processes and outcomes should include the completion of an individual thesis (based upon an
original contribution to knowledge or original application of knowledge) that passes evaluation by an
expert university committee with an external representation.
1. Professional Doctorates
Programmes known as “Professional doctorates“, or practice related doctorates, are doctorates that
focus on embedding research in a reflective manner into another professional practice. They must
meet the same core standards as “traditional” doctorates in order to ensure the same high level of
quality. It may be appropriate to consider using different titles to distinguish between this type of
professional doctorates and PhDs.
In order to develop a broad discussion on this topic it will be important to ensure the dissemination of
information from those European countries that have experience in this area, and particularly the UK,
where the number of professional doctorates is growing rapidly across the European higher education
sector.
2. Inter-sectoral collaboration and mobility
Universities are increasingly involved in cooperation at doctoral level with other sectors such as industry, business, independent research organisations or public services. Intersectoral mobility and in particular doctorates earned through intensive university – industry collaboration and the placement of doctoral candidates in industrial and other laboratories enhances university industry cooperation and adds value to the individual researchers concerned, enhancing their experience, skills and employment prospects. Building strong links between universities with other sectors thus ultimately supports efforts to strengthen the transmission of knowledge as a determining factor in innovation.
VI. Status and career development of doctoral candidates and other early stage
Researchers
Ensuring career opportunities for early stage researchers is not the responsibility of higher education
institutions alone but needs to be regarded a collective effort if Europe is to meet its goals. In reaching
these goals a particular emphasis is put on increasing the number of researchers as highly skilled
young researchers make a significant contribution to the production of knowledge and innovation.
Ensuring appropriate working conditions, rights and career prospects for young researchers, both in
academia and in a range of other sectors is thus of the utmost importance and one of the crucial
preconditions for success. This has been underlined in particular in the European Commission’s
Charter for Researchers and Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers (2005) that stresses
the importance of sustainability and continuity of career development for researchers at all stages of
their career including early stage researchers (doctoral candidates and post-doctoral researchers).
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Doctoral Programmes in Europe” BFUG Report, Brussels, 20 January 2007
12
1. Status of doctoral candidates
Doctoral candidates are early stage researchers who are vital to Europe’s development and, as stated in
the Salzburg principles, should have all commensurate rights. Universities and public authorities in
Europe share a collective responsibility to address the status and conditions of doctoral researchers.
The results of the EUA survey among the Bologna Process member countries focusing on funding of
doctoral candidates and programmes indicates that, out of 36 participating countries, in 22 countries
the status of a doctoral candidate is mixed, which means that doctoral candidates are considered both
as students and employees (Table 2). In 8 countries doctoral candidates are seen only as students and
in 3 countries only as employees. Whatever the status of a doctoral candidate is, it is crucial that s/he
is given all commensurate rights including healthcare, social security and pension rights. (…)
2. Post-doctoral researchers
Appropriate status and working conditions should be also recognised as essential for post doctoral
researchers for whom clear academic structures and a variety of career perspectives are also needed.
Post-doctoral researchers must be recognised as highly skilled professionals with a key role in
developing the European knowledge society, as underlined in the EC Charter and Code of Conduct for
the Recruitment of Researchers. This implies that:
• The duration of the post doctoral phase without a clear career perspective should be limited to
five years;
• They should be eligible to apply for national and international grant schemes to fund their
research;
• Initiatives like the Independent Researcher grant scheme of the ERC should be encouraged;
• If the number of researchers is to rise and be covered by appropriate salaries, governments
should invest more into research and social infrastructure for researchers in order to make the
European Research Area more attractive.
VII. Funding
Ensuring appropriate and sustainable funding of doctoral programmes and doctoral candidates as well
as greater and targeted investment in higher education institutions and their infrastructure is the 10th
and final Salzburg principle, and quite simply needs to be implemented, given the crucial role of
doctoral education and training as the key formative stage of a research career in both academia and
non-academic sectors of employment and that because the attractiveness of a future career in research
is determined largely at the doctoral stage; hence the importance of ensuring status and financial
support of the doctoral candidate, and of offering adequate incentives.
On the basis of the analysis of the questionnaires received from the BFUG member countries it is clear
that scholarships/ fellowships/ grants are the main mode of funding doctoral candidates, although in
about half of the countries, salaries or teaching assistantships are also offered, in the Slovak Republic
only salaries. In most cases, a mix of modes is used to fund doctoral candidates (Table 3). When grants
are made to doctoral programmes, more often these are given to research projects (26) rather than to
higher education institutions (16) (Table 4), but here again, the majority of countries use a mixture of
funding modes. (…)
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Doctoral Programmes in Europe” BFUG Report, Brussels, 20 January 2007
13
On the basis of the analysis of the EUA survey among the Bologna Process member countries it is
recommended that:
• Funding for doctoral candidates should be stable, covering the full period of the doctoral
programme, and provide sufficient means to live and work in decent conditions.
• Funding should be sufficiently attractive to encourage suitably-qualified candidates from
lower income groups, as well as sufficiently flexible to support the needs of part time students
over a longer period of study.
• More information on funding mechanisms and funding levels of doctoral candidates and
doctoral programmes/ schools is needed in order to create a vision of doctoral education
within a European Higher Education Area that is attractive and competitive on a global scale.
• There is an urgent need for greater consultation and coordination at the regional, national and
European levels between government ministries, research councils and other funding agencies
on doctoral education funding and career development.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Matching Ambition with Responsibilities and Resources”
Final Conclusions - Preparing Recommendations for the London Communiqué, Bologna Seminar on Doctoral Programmes,
Nice, 7-9 December 2006
14
“Matching Ambition with Responsibilities and Resources” Final Conclusions - Preparing Recommendations for the London Communiqué, Bologna Seminar on Doctoral Programmes, Nice, 7-9 December 2006 http://www.eua.be/index.php?id=48&no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=249&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=1
II.1. Setting the scene
In formulating the conclusions and recommendations that follow participants underlined the
importance of the uniqueness of the doctoral cycle that provides training by and for research and is
focused on the advancement of knowledge through original research. Participants furthermore
reiterated the crucial role of the doctoral cycle in contributing to meeting Europe’s research goals and
in linking the European Higher Education and Research Areas.
1. While doctoral programmes are unique they should not be considered in isolation but in
relation to the implementation of the three Bologna cycles as a whole: a research component,
and the development of transferable skills, need to be adequately included and developed
throughout the cycles.
2. A range of innovative doctorate programmes are emerging to respond to the changing
demands of a fast-evolving labour market. Employability of doctoral researchers both within
and outside academic institutions, as well as individual and societal needs for lifelong
education and training, have acted as a catalyst to the development of new programmes,
including professional doctorates, more industrial collaboration and increased European and
international cooperation.
3. Doctoral programmes are a key component of European higher education in a global
context; questions of internationalisation and mobility, and the establishment of joint
degrees at doctoral level, are central to institutional strategic development.
4. Greater attention is needed to the social dimension of the third cycle. Equity is a major
concern. Equality of access to, and ability to succeed in, the third cycle must be a
consideration, whether inequality derives from gender, ethnicity, financial situation or other
circumstances.
5. Doctoral programmes are also crucial for fostering innovation and creativity in society, and
it is vital to invest both in high quality disciplinary research and in inter-disciplinary and
intersectoral programmes.
6. The need for greater and targeted investment in the third cycle is clear, and should be
addressed as a matter of urgency. It should not be forgotten, however, that this also implies
investment in the first two cycles. It is important, in particular, to ensure that second cycle
(master) degrees are not only driven by market demand given the integral link between the
second and the third cycle.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Matching Ambition with Responsibilities and Resources”
Final Conclusions - Preparing Recommendations for the London Communiqué, Bologna Seminar on Doctoral Programmes,
Nice, 7-9 December 2006
15
II. 2. The role of higher education institutions
Higher education institutions fully accept their responsibility to develop and deliver high quality
doctoral programmes. This requires autonomous institutions able to develop strategies and policies in
line with their own missions and goals and create the necessary framework conditions at institutional
level that enable critical mass.
2.1 Providing structure and organisation
Accepting responsibility for the provision of high quality doctoral programmes involves introducing
the appropriate structures within institutions. Organisational structures chosen must demonstrate
added value for the institution, in particular in seeking to:
• counteract the isolation of the early stage researcher, from other disciplines, or from the
larger peer group, or the larger scientific community.
• establish transparency of expectations, quality and assessment standards (supervision etc.),
• create synergies regarding transferable skills development (at institutional or at inter-
institutional level)
Different solutions may be appropriate to different contexts and the choice of structure is a matter for
each institution, based upon the specific institutional aims which these structures are supposed to
meet.
Recent developments and an analysis of practice across Europe points to the emergence of two main
models of high quality, internationally oriented and networked doctoral/research/graduate schools as
organisational structures:
• structures including master & doctoral candidates & providing crosscutting administrative,
training and development support, or,
• structures including doctoral candidates only, around a research theme or a cross-
disciplinary area & possibly including several institutions.
2.2 Developing attractive research career perspectives for early stage
researchers
It is similarly the role of higher education institutions to take responsibility for: • Promoting attractive research careers and career perspectives for doctoral
researchers in collaboration with partners outside academia, thus promoting the development of clear career paths inside and outside academia and between academia and other sectors of employment
• Creating attractive conditions for research, in accordance with the provisions of the European Researchers’ Charter & the Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers
• Concentrating funding to create more effective PhD training Post-doctoral researchers European higher education institutions need to pay attention not only to the career development of doctoral researchers but also to the strategic need to make research careers
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Matching Ambition with Responsibilities and Resources”
Final Conclusions - Preparing Recommendations for the London Communiqué, Bologna Seminar on Doctoral Programmes,
Nice, 7-9 December 2006
16
attractive for post-doctoral researchers and to facilitate their career development. Clear academic career structures and a variety of career perspectives in academia as well as in industry, commerce and the public sector are needed, both for individuals and for Europe to compete on the global stage, taking account of the recommendations made under 4.1.
2.3 Ensuring access and admission
In a fast-changing environment, it is essential to maintain flexibility in admissions to doctoral
programmes, and full institutional autonomy: diversity of institutional missions and context, and the
growing importance of lifelong learning, mean that there are good reasons for different entry
requirements in institutions and programmes provided fairness, transparency and objectivity is
ensured;
The Bologna commitment that the second cycle gives access (= right to be considered for admission) to
the third cycle should be maintained, but access to the third cycle should not be restricted to this route.
2.4 Enhancing the internationalisation of doctoral programmes
Mobility is an integral part of doctoral education at many universities. Higher education institutions
should support enhanced mobility at doctoral level within the framework of inter-institutional
collaboration as an element of their broader international strategy. Institutions, but especially public
authorities, need to address legal, administrative and social obstacles, for example concerning visas,
work permits and social security issues.
Both international and transsectoral and interdisciplinary mobility should be recognised as bringing
added value for the career development of doctoral researchers and other early stage researchers.
Joint doctorate degrees, European doctorates and co-tutelle arrangements should be further
developed and considered as an important instrument of international inter-institutional cooperation.
II. 3. Improving the Quality of Doctoral Programmes
3.1 Diversifying doctoral programmes
A number of diverse routes to the doctorate have been developed in Europe in recent years. These
recent developments include doctorates tailored towards specific professions (so-called “professional”
doctorates), joint doctorates and the European doctorate, and a variety of university-industry
collaboration based doctorates.
All awards described as Doctorates should (no matter what their type or form) be based on a core of
processes and outcomes. Original research has to remain the main component of all doctorates. There
should be no doctorate without original research.
Core processes and outcomes should include the completion of an individual thesis (based upon an
original contribution to knowledge or original application of knowledge) that passes evaluation by an
expert university committee with external representation.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Matching Ambition with Responsibilities and Resources”
Final Conclusions - Preparing Recommendations for the London Communiqué, Bologna Seminar on Doctoral Programmes,
Nice, 7-9 December 2006
17
Professional Doctorates
So-called “professional” doctorates are doctorates that focus on embedding research in a reflective
manner into another professional practice. They must meet the same core standards as ‘traditional’
doctorates in order to ensure the same high level of quality. It may be appropriate to consider using
different titles to distinguish between this type of professional doctorates and PhDs.
In order to ensure a broad discussion on this topic it will be important to ensure the dissemination of
information on the rapidly growing number of professional doctorates – particularly in the UK but also
in other countries - across the entire European higher education sector.
3.2 Supervision, monitoring & assessment
The importance of supervision, monitoring and assessment, as outlined in the Salzburg principles,
must continue to be stressed, and universities encouraged and supported in the development and
dissemination of good practices in the management of research degrees. Arrangements need to be
based upon a transparent contractual framework of shared responsibilities between candidates,
supervisors and the institution, and, where appropriate other partners, as indicated in the Salzburg
recommendations. Attention should be paid in particular to ensuring: multiple supervision, the
continuous professional skills development of academic staff and performance reviews of supervisors.
Multiple supervision should be encouraged, also at international level, through tutoring and co-
tutoring by academic supervisors in different European countries.
Assessment of the thesis should be done by an expert university committee with external
representation. The impact of the supervisor on the outcome of the process should be limited. This
does not preclude participation of the supervisor in the examining body, especially when this is a large
body or when the thesis defence is public.
3.3 Transferable skills development
Transferable skills development, which should already be an integral part of first and second cycle study programmes, is also important in the third cycle, and should be developed in the context of overarching institutional support structures at doctoral level. The main goal should be to recognise and raise awareness among doctoral candidates of the skills they acquire through research, thus improving their employment prospects both in academia and on the broader labour market. Ensuring that adequate funding is devoted to transferable skills development is crucial. It is likewise important to ensure that reference to transferable skills development is included in institutional quality assessment procedures.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Matching Ambition with Responsibilities and Resources”
Final Conclusions - Preparing Recommendations for the London Communiqué, Bologna Seminar on Doctoral Programmes,
Nice, 7-9 December 2006
18
II. 4. Public responsibility
4.1 Status and conditions of doctoral and postdoctoral researchers
Universities and public authorities in Europe share a collective responsibility to address the status and
conditions of doctoral and post doctoral researchers. Doctoral candidates are early stage researchers
who are vital to Europe’s development and, as stated in the Salzburg principles, should have all
commensurate rights.
Appropriate status and working conditions should also be recognised as essential for post doctoral
researchers for whom clear academic structures and a variety of career perspectives are also needed.
Post-doctoral researchers should be recognised as professionals with a key role in developing the
European knowledge society, as underlined in the European Researchers’ Charter and Code of
Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers. This implies that:
• The duration of the post doctoral phase without a clear career perspective should be limited
to five years.
• They should be eligible to apply for national and international grant schemes to fund their
research.
• Initiatives like the Independent Researcher grant scheme of the ERC should be encouraged.
• If the number of researchers is to rise and be covered by appropriate salaries, governments
should invest more in research and social infrastructure for researchers in order to make the
European Research Area more attractive.
4.2 Funding
Ensuring appropriate and sustainable funding of doctoral programmes and doctoral candidates as well
as higher education institutions and their infrastructure is the 10th and final Salzburg principle, and
quite simply needs to be implemented, given the crucial role of doctoral education and training as the
key formative stage of a research career in both academia and non-academic sectors of employment
and that because the attractiveness of a future career in research is determined largely at the doctoral
stage. Hence the importance of ensuring status and financial support of the doctoral candidate, and of
offering adequate incentives.
On the basis of the provisional analysis of the questionnaires received from BFUG
members it is recommended that:
• Funding for doctoral candidates should be stable, covering the full period of the doctoral
programme, and provide sufficient means to live and work in decent conditions.
• Funding should be sufficiently attractive to encourage suitably-qualified candidates from
lower income groups, as well as sufficiently flexible to support the needs of part time students
over a longer period of study.
• there is an urgent need for greater consultation and coordination at the national level
between government ministries, research councils and other funding agencies (including
European Institutions) on doctoral programme financing and career development.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
„Stellungnahme der Österreichischen Rektorenkonferenz zur internationalen Diskussion über
verschiedene Doktoratsformen“
20. November 2006
19
„Stellungnahme der Österreichischen Rektorenkonferenz zur internationalen Diskussion über verschiedene Doktoratsformen“ 20. November 2006 http://www.reko.ac.at/upload/Stellungnahme.Doktoratsformen.2006__Endfassung_.pdf
1. Definitionen
Da auch im internationalen Kontext die Terminologie zu den verschiedenen Doktoratsprogrammen
nicht einheitlich ist, möchte die Österreichische Rektorenkonferenz zuerst die drei verwendeten
Doktoratsformen und das österreichische universitäre Verständnis dieser kurz umreißen.
Doktorat: Jedes Doktorat wird für eine originäre wissenschaftliche Leistung vergeben (Dissertation),
die die Fähigkeit zur eigenen wissenschaftlichen Forschung und die Beherrschung der
wissenschaftlichen Methoden des Faches beweist. Insofern sind alle Doktorate
wissenschaftliche Doktorate. Die Unterschiede liegen eher in der Motivation der Studierenden
oder in der Thematik und Organisation. Wie schon in der gemeinsamen Stellungnahme der drei
deutschsprachigen Rektorenkonferenzen festgehalten wurde, ist die Promotion das Proprium der
Universitäten.
Wissenschaftliches Doktorat (international häufig als PhD bezeichnet): Dieses Doktorat ist
insbesondere für Studierende, die eine wissenschaftliche Laufbahn anstreben. Häufig wird das
Doktoratsstudium im Anschluss an das Diplom/Magister-Studium begonnen. Das Dissertationsthema
wird in Absprache zwischen DissertantIn und BetreuerIn festgelegt, kann aber auch von der
Universität vorgegeben werden.
Ziel: Wissenschaft als Beruf betreiben
Professionelles Doktorat: Bei diesen Doktoraten liegt der Focus der wissenschaftlichen Thematik
eher im anwendungsnahen Bereich bzw. im Berufsfeld des Doktoranden. Das Studium dient auch der
beruflichen (Weiter-)Qualifikation.
Ziel: Wissenschaft im Beruf betreiben
Erläuterungen: Professionelle Doktorate wurden in Großbritannien in den 1980ern als Reaktion auf
einen Bedarf der Studierenden, der Industrie, der Wirtschaft und des öffentlichen Lebens entwickelt.
Diese Programme, werden häufig von Personen absolviert, die bereits im Berufleben stehen
(gestanden sind) und ihre Karriereperspektiven verbessern möchten. Der Forschungsanteil dieser
Doktoratsprogramme variiert. Sie enthalten einen signifikanten Anteil an Lehrveranstaltungen und
somit spezifische learning outcomes. Professionelle Doktorate in GB haben eigene Titel (nicht PhD
sondern z.B. DBM - Doctor of
Business and Management).
Industrielles Doktorat: Der Terminus bezeichnet kein eigenes Doktorat, sondern
wissenschaftliche Doktoratsstudien, bei denen eine enge Zusammenarbeit mit der Industrie
gegeben ist, z.B. bei der Wahl des Dissertationsthemas, bei der Durchführung der Dissertation, bei der
Betreuung, bei der Finanzierung etc.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
„Stellungnahme der Österreichischen Rektorenkonferenz zur internationalen Diskussion über
verschiedene Doktoratsformen“
20. November 2006
20
Erläuterung: Um die Kooperation der Universitäten mit der Wirtschaft und Industrie zu steigern und
weiterzuentwickeln, beschlossen die Regierungen in Schweden und Dänemark industrielle Doktorate
einzuführen bzw. zu fördern. In Dänemark und Schweden werden die Universitäten und
Unternehmen, die ein industrielles Doktoratsprojekt laufen haben, finanziell von Staat und Regierung
unterstützt, wenn die gesetzten Richtlinien erfüllt werden.
In Österreich gibt es insbesondere im technisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Bereich industrielle
Doktorate in diesem Sinn, ohne dass der Ausdruck verwendet wird.
2. Ausgangssituation in Österreich
Österreich kennt formal nur eine Form (wissenschaftliche) von Doktoratsstudien (§51 Abs. 2,
Zl 12 UG 2002). Die Umsetzung des gesetzlichen Rahmens durch Studienpläne und durch die
Praxis ist aber sehr unterschiedlich, so dass – ohne dass der Terminus verwendet wird - zum
Teil zu einem professional doctorate analoge Studienangebote existieren. Es gibt auch Beispiele für
eine Zusammenarbeit mit der Industrie bei der Durchführung von Dissertationen etc. Schließlich soll
noch die Anomalie erwähnt werden, dass bestimmte Diplomstudiengänge (ohne Dissertation) mit
einem Doktortitel abschließen.
3. Empfehlungen für die österreichische Position in der internationalen
Diskussion
Aus den verschiedensten Gründen (u.a. Bologna, Lissabon) sollten möglichst viele (geeignete und
interessierte) Graduierte die Möglichkeit haben, sich weiter in Richtung einer Forschungstätigkeit
oder einer wissenschaftlichen Berufsausübung zu qualifizieren.
• Neben den im engeren Sinn wissenschaftlichen Doktoraten (insbesondere PhD) können die
Universitäten Doktoratsstudien anbieten, die stärker berufsbezogen sind (professional
doctorate). Ob diese Doktorate mit eigenen Titeln bezeichnet werden, muss innerhalb der
Universitäten entschieden werden. Eine gewisse Vereinheitlichung auf nationaler und
europäischer Ebene ist jedoch anzustreben, sollte aber Aufgabe der Universitäten selbst sein
(EUA).
• Professionelle Doktorate verlangen eine vergleichbare wissenschaftliche Leistung
(Dissertation). Das Verhältnis zwischen curricularen Anteilen und eigener wissenschaftlicher
Arbeit kann im Vergleich zum PhD zugunsten der curricularen Anteile verschoben sein.
• Industrielles Doktorat: Da die so genannten industriellen Doktorate eigentlich nur die Form
der Finanzierung ausweisen, jedoch in ihrer Ausführung als wissenschaftliche Doktorate
angelegt sind, vertritt die ÖRK die Ansicht, dass diese nicht als solche differenziert werden. Im
Sinne der Lisbon-Strategy ist eine engere Zusammenarbeit von Universitäten und Industrie
durch gemeinsam geplante, betreute und durchgeführte Dissertationen durchaus anzustreben.
Dabei müssen aber die Qualitätsanforderungen des entsprechenden Doktorates und der
Universität erfüllt werden.
• Um die international und auch nationale angepeilten Kriterien3 von hochwertigen PhD-
Programmen realisieren zu können, möchte die ÖRK nochmals auf Notwendigkeit einer
ausreichenden Finanzierung hinweisen.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Doctoral Programmes for the European Knowledge Society”
Report on the EUA Doctoral Programmes Project 2004-2005
21
“Doctoral Programmes for the European Knowledge Society” Report on the EUA Doctoral Programmes Project 2004-2005 http://www.eua.be/index.php?id=128
Executive Summary
Objectives
Doctoral studies are in a process of change today in Europe reflecting the need to adapt research
training to meet the challenges of the global labour market, technological advances, new profiles and
demands of doctoral candidates, and not least, the policy objectives of European governments. To
achieve the ambitious “Lisbon Objectives”, Europe both seeks and needs to increase the number of
researchers and research related careers, and doctoral training programmes can seen as a cornerstone
in reaching such a goal. In the context of the “Bologna Process”, doctoral training has gained recently
greater importance on the European Higher Education Agenda. In the Berlin Communiqué in 2003,
Ministers responsible for Higher Education added a new action line on higher education and research
as two pillars of the knowledge society and emphasised the importance of doctoral programmes as the
‘third cycle’ in the “Bologna Process”.
The European University Association (EUA), as the main representative of higher education
institutions awarding doctoral degrees in Europe, proposed and launched with the European
Commission’s support the present project as a timely initiative to provide some analysis of key issues
facing doctoral training. In doing so, EUA set itself two main objectives: to identify essential conditions
for successful doctoral programmes in Europe; and to promote and encourage cooperation in the
development of doctoral programmes at the European level. 48 universities from across 22 European
countries were selected as project participants from an “open call” issued by the EUA to its university
membership.
Findings
The main findings of the project address three issues: the Structure and Organization of doctoral
programmes; Supervision, Monitoring and Assessment; and Mobility, European collaboration and
joint doctoral degrees. The analysis focuses on connecting these issues with innovations and good
practices in university experience across Europe.
On the structure and organization of doctoral programmes the study shows a considerable diversity
not only across different countries in Europe, but also across universities within the same country and
across faculties within the same university. The following issues are examined: disciplinary differences
in the organisation of doctoral training; various types of doctoral degrees; training in core and
transferable skills; doctoral training and teaching; duration and funding of doctoral training;
recruitment practices; and the profile and status of doctoral candidates. Present “good practices”
identified in the project demonstrate that establishing common institutional guidelines, codes and
regulations, defined clearly at the highest institutional level and providing rules on recruitment,
supervision, exams, evaluation and defence of the thesis, can prove to be a highly beneficial approach
for universities in Europe. Individual study programmes (“apprenticeship model”) are questioned as
being appropriate to meet the new multiple challenges of research training for careers in a competitive
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Doctoral Programmes for the European Knowledge Society”
Report on the EUA Doctoral Programmes Project 2004-2005
22
labour market, with an increasing tendency in many European countries towards structured
programmes with doctoral candidates grouped in research / graduate / doctoral schools.
Supervision, monitoring and assessment procedures are critically important for the quality of the
experience and training of doctoral candidates. The project focuses on qualification requirements,
responsibilities and duties of supervisors; training of supervisors; workloads of supervisors;
supervision models; doctoral candidates’ progress assessment; requirements for the doctoral thesis
and its defence; and finally, the follow-up “tracking” of doctoral candidates’ career outcomes. The
project shows that universities are aware of the constant need to sustain and improve the quality of
their supervision, monitoring and assessment procedures; innovative practices in such areas as
multiple supervision models, personal development plans for doctoral candidates are being developed
and adapted to differing institutional traditions.
Mobility and European collaboration are an integral part of doctoral training at many universities.
Many doctoral programmes seek to provide appropriate mobility mechanisms to enhance the relevant
research experience of their doctoral candidates, but there are still numerous obstacles of a legal,
administrative, financial, personal and cultural character that limit mobility throughout Europe. Issues
focussed upon in the project include international mobility and inter-institutional collaboration; inter-
sectorial mobility; joint doctoral degrees and the debate on a ”European Doctorate”. Good practices
show that mobility can be an important strategic tool of doctoral training, leading to the wider
research experience and career development opportunities of doctoral candidates in his/her chosen
field, and better research co-operation and networking between institutions
Policy Context
A key innovative feature of the Doctoral Programmes project was the open working dialogue that was
established from the outset between its university partners and higher education policy makers and
practitioners. Project partners took the initiative to link its activities to the policy debate through their
active engagement in a series of major conferences, for example, the Salzburg Conference (February
2005) that was part of the Bologna Process Work Programme 2003 – 2005 and which identified “ten
basic principles” for the future development of doctoral programmes, that fed into the formulation of
recommendations for the “Bologna Process” Ministerial meeting held in Bergen in May 2005. In this
way the project, in spite of its small scale and duration, had an impact on the wider research and
policy-making communities across Europe. The project sought to achieve, therefore, an “evidence-
based” dialogue reflecting upon the present landscape of doctoral training, current practices and
innovations, and issues for reform.
Conclusions
Doctoral programmes are considered to be a crucial source of a new generation of researchers and to
serve as the main bridge between the European Higher Education and Research Areas. As such, they
have become an official and important part of the political agenda in the Bologna process. However,
doctoral training is markedly different from the first and second cycles of higher education. Its main
characteristic, which makes it specific, is that the most predominant and essential component of the
doctorate is research. Doctoral candidates have to prove their ability to perform original and
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Doctoral Programmes for the European Knowledge Society”
Report on the EUA Doctoral Programmes Project 2004-2005
23
independent research within a scientific discipline or interdisciplinary collaboration. Individuality,
originality and a certain autonomy are important features of the doctorate.
Universities fully recognise that they have responsibility to offer doctoral candidates more than core
research disciplinary skills based on individual training by doing research. They are increasingly
introducing courses and modules offering transferable skills training and preparing candidates for the
careers in various sectors. Crucially, the re-organisation of doctoral training towards structured
programmes and training in a wide range of transferable skills in courses or modules requires
adequate financing. It should be emphasised that reforms of doctoral education are proceeding at
varied paces and, in some countries, the debate on reform is only at the beginning. While the reform of
the first two cycles is well underway across Europe, the transformation of doctoral education presents
a different order of challenge.
The present project, in common with the experience of other studies, points to the need for more
systematic collection of data on doctorate completion rates and career outcomes. For the future
implementation of reforms in doctoral programmes to be carried out effectively, the collection and
analysis of such “key indicator” data will be essential in measuring the success of structured doctoral
programmes in achieving policy objectives.
As a final remark, it is hoped that the present project has worked to increase awareness of the
importance of “joined-up” governmental thinking at the level of improving doctoral programmes and
career perspectives and the need for coordinated action involving higher education institutions,
government ministries for education and research, innovation and technology, national research
councils, and the European Commission.
EUA received the mandate of the Bologna Ministers meeting in Bergen in May 2005 to follow up its
work on doctoral programmes over the next two years. Thus doctoral programmes and research
careers remain at the heart of the Association’s work and the present project will be followed up:
through targeted action within the Bologna process resulting in a report to be presented to the next
Bologna Ministers meeting in London in 2007; through a project focussing on doctoral careers; and
through ‘hands on’ workshops for universities on important issues, for example the organisation of
doctoral/graduate schools in a European context.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“The European Higher Education Area - Achieving the Goals”
Communiqué of the Conference of European Ministers Responsible for Higher Education, Bergen, 19-20 May 2005
24
“The European Higher Education Area - Achieving the Goals” Communiqué of the Conference of European Ministers Responsible for Higher Education, Bergen, 19-20 May 2005 http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/documents/
Higher education and research
We underline the importance of higher education in further enhancing research and the importance of
research in underpinning higher education for the economic and cultural development of our societies
and for social cohesion. We note that the efforts to introduce structural change and improve the
quality of teaching should not detract from the effort to strengthen research and innovation. We
therefore emphasise the importance of research and research training in maintaining and improving
the quality of and enhancing the competitiveness and attractiveness of the EHEA. With a view to
achieving better results we recognise the need to improve the synergy between the higher education
sector and other research sectors throughout our respective countries and between the EHEA and the
European Research Area.
To achieve these objectives, doctoral level qualifications need to be fully aligned with the EHEA
overarching framework for qualifications using the outcomes-based approach. The core component of
doctoral training is the advancement of knowledge through original research. Considering the need for
structured doctoral programmes and the need for transparent supervision and assessment, we note
that the normal workload of the third cycle in most countries would correspond to 3-4 years full time.
We urge universities to ensure that their doctoral programmes promote interdisciplinary training and
the development of transferable skills, thus meeting the needs of the wider employment market. We
need to achieve an overall increase in the numbers of doctoral candidates taking up research careers
within the EHEA. We consider participants in third cycle programmes both as students and as early
stage researchers. We charge the Bologna Follow-up Group with inviting the European University
Association, together with other interested partners, to prepare a report under the responsibility of the
Follow-up Group on the further development of the basic principles for doctoral programmes, to be
presented to Ministers in 2007. Overregulation of doctoral programmes must be avoided.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Conclusions and Recommendations”
Bologna Seminar on “Doctoral Programmes for the European Knowledge Society”, Salzburg, 3-5 February 2005
25
“Conclusions and Recommendations” Bologna Seminar on “Doctoral Programmes for the European Knowledge Society”, Salzburg, 3-5 February 2005 http://www.eua.be/fileadmin/user_upload/files/EUA1_documents/Salzburg_Conclusions.1
7. From the discussions in Salzburg a consensus emerged on a set of ten basic principles as
follows:
i. The core component of doctoral training is the advancement of knowledge through
original research. At the same time it is recognised that doctoral training must increasingly meet
the needs of an employment market that is wider than academia.
ii. Embedding in institutional strategies and policies: universities as institutions need to
assume responsibility for ensuring that the doctoral programmes and research training they offer are
designed to meet new challenges and include appropriate professional career development
opportunities.
iii. The importance of diversity: the rich diversity of doctoral programmes in Europe - including
joint doctorates - is a strength which has to be underpinned by quality and sound practice.
iv. Doctoral candidates as early stage researchers: should be recognized as professionals – with
commensurate rights - who make a key contribution to the creation of new knowledge.
v. The crucial role of supervision and assessment: in respect of individual doctoral candidates,
arrangements for supervision and assessment should be based on a transparent contractual framework
of shared responsibilities between doctoral candidates, supervis ors and the institution (and where
appropriate including other partners).
vi. Achieving critical mass: Doctoral programmes should seek to achieve critical mass and should
draw on different types of innovative practice being introduced in universities across Europe, bearing
in mind that different solutions may be appropriate to different contexts and in particular across larger
and smaller European countries. These range from graduate schools in major universities to
international, national and regional collaboration between universities.
vii. Duration: doctoral programmes should operate within an appropriate time duration (three to
four years full-time as a rule).
viii. The promotion of innovative structures: to meet the challenge of interdisciplinary training
and the development of transferable skills
ix. Increasing mobility: Doctoral programmes should seek to offer geographical as well as
interdisciplinary and intersectoral mobility and international collaboration within an integrated
framework of cooperation between universities and other partners.
x. Ensuring appropriate funding: the development of quality doctoral programmes and the
successful completion by doctoral candidates requires appropriate and sustainable funding.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
„Das Doktoratsstudium in Österreich. Nationale Positionierung im Kontext europäischer Entwicklungen“
Gemeinsames Positionspapier des bm:bwk und der ÖRK, Wien, Jänner 2005
26
„Das Doktoratsstudium in Österreich. Nationale Positionierung im Kontext europäischer Entwicklungen“ Gemeinsames Positionspapier des bm:bwk und der ÖRK, Wien, Jänner 2005 http://www.reko.ac.at/upload/Positionspapier.pdf
Für die zukünftige Entwicklung des Doktoratsstudiums im Europäischen Hochschul- und
Forschungsraum sollen im Folgenden wesentliche übergeordnete Aspekte angesprochen werden. Die
institutionelle Ausgestaltung der Doktoratsstudien muss allerdings von den Universitäten im Rahmen
ihrer Autonomie selbst wahrgenommen werden.
1. Gestaltung des Studiums:
1.1. Das generelle Ausbildungsziel des Doktoratsstudiums ist die Weiterentwicklung der
Befähigung zu selbständiger wissenschaftlicher Arbeit auf der Grundlage von Diplom-
und Magisterstudien; für die einzelnen Disziplinen und Studien sollen spezifische
Ausbildungsziele definiert werden (learning outcomes).
1.2. In Österreich soll es primär wissenschaftlich orientierte Doktoratsstudien geben. Die
enge Einbindung von Doktorandinnen und Doktoranden in die Forschung bzw. die scientific
community ihres Faches wird angestrebt.
1.3. Die Dissertation kann fachspezifisch unterschiedliche Formen annehmen und z. B. durch
Publikationen in begutachteten Zeitschriften ersetzt werden. Eine
Veröffentlichungspflicht kann von den Universitäten autonom bestimmt werden.
1.4. Die Mindeststudiendauer soll 3 Jahre betragen; berufstätigen Studierenden soll die
Möglichkeit eines Teilzeitstudiums geboten werden.
1.5. Angestrebt wird eine stärkere Strukturierung des Doktoratsstudiums als bisher; sofern
dies fachspezifisch sinnvoll erscheint, kann dies auch zu einer Curricularisierung führen.
1.6. Ein Abgehen von der Einzelbetreuung wird angestrebt, in der Regel soll die Betreuung
durch mehrere Wissenschafterinnen bzw. Wissenschafter erfolgen. Dabei sollen
interdisziplinäre, interuniversitäre sowie internationale Komponenten berücksichtigt werden.
1.7. Die derzeitige gesetzliche Regelung des Zugangs wird zu überdenken sein, dieser soll von
den Universitäten kompetitiv gestaltet werden können und einen Aspekt der institutionellen
Profilbildung darstellen.
2. Finanzierung:
2.1. Auf institutioneller Ebene wird die vermehrte Einrichtung von Doktoratskollegs an
Universitäten angestrebt. Deren Auswahl soll auf Basis eines einheitlichen Evaluierungs-
verfahrens erfolgen.
2.2. Auf der Ebene individueller Förderungen sollen verschiedene Varianten wie z.B. Anstellung
an Universitäten (teaching/research assistantships) oder inner- und außeruniversitär
vergebene Stipendien möglich sein. Die derzeit bestehenden individuellen Förderungen
werden als bei weitem nicht ausreichend eingeschätzt.
2.3. Altersgrenzen für individuelle Förderungen erscheinen nicht immer zielführend gewählt
und sollen im Sinne des Lebenslangen Lernens grundsätzlich überdacht werden.
2.4. Für Institutionen und Personen sollten Förderungen ausschließlich auf Grundlage eines
Wettbewerbs vergeben werden. Der jährliche Finanzierungsbedarf dafür in Österreich wird
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
„Das Doktoratsstudium in Österreich. Nationale Positionierung im Kontext europäischer Entwicklungen“
Gemeinsames Positionspapier des bm:bwk und der ÖRK, Wien, Jänner 2005
27
von der Österreichischen Rektorenkonferenz derzeit mit rund 20 Millionen Euro
eingeschätzt.
3. Internationalisierung/Mobilität:
3.1. Internationale Kooperationen sind bei verschiedenen Aspekten des Doktoratsstudiums
(Organisation von Doktoratskollegs, Entwicklung von joint degrees, Mehrfachbetreuung,
Evaluierungen) erstrebenswert und sollten weiter ausgebaut werden.
3.2. Disziplinenspezifisch sollte es vermehrte Angebote für Sprachunterricht auf hohem
Niveau (z.B. Verfassen von Publikationen auf Englisch) geben.
3.3. Die Erhöhung der internationalen Mobilität der Doktorandinnen und Doktoranden
wird angestrebt; sie soll gefördert, aber nicht generell verpflichtend sein.
3.4. Die internationale Kompatibilität österreichischer Doktoratsstudien sowie Berufs-
berechtigungen soll in Curricula und Gesetzgebung entsprechende Berücksichtigung
finden.
4. Laufbahnen/Karrieremöglichkeiten
4.1. Der Status der Doktorandinnen und Doktoranden an ihren Universitäten ist von
diesen im Rahmen ihrer Autonomie selbst zu bestimmen.
4.2. Inneruniversitär können Dissertationsvereinbarungen zwischen Doktorandinnen und
Doktoranden, Universitäten und Betreuerinnen und Betreuern abgeschlossen werden, die
etwa zusätzlich zum Eingangsverfahren jährliche Evaluierungen des Studienfortgangs
umfassen.
4.3. Derzeit wird kein Handlungsbedarf in Bezug auf die Habilitation gesehen, ihre Bedeutung
steht jedoch in offensichtlichem Zusammenhang mit zukünftigen Entwicklungen im
Doktoratsstudium. Ein aufgewertetes Doktoratsstudium (PhD-Studium) könnte die
Habilitation ersetzen.
4.4. Die Vermittlung von Schlüsselkompetenzen sollte idealerweise bereits im Diplom- bzw.
Magisterstudium beginnen; im Doktoratsstudium sollte sie auf hohem Niveau fortgesetzt
werden.
4.5. Zur Erreichung von Chancengleichheit von Frauen und Männern in der Wissenschaft
ist bereits in der Dissertations- und post-doc-Phase das Augenmerk auf Maßnahmen zur
Frauenförderung bzw. des Abbaus bestehender Barrieren (Vereinbarkeit von Beruf und
Familie) zu legen.
4.6. Der Schaffung beruflicher Perspektiven für Promovierte, inklusive der Förderung des
wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchses, kommt entscheidende Bedeutung für die Attraktivität des
Doktoratsstudiums zu; die Universitäten, der öffentliche Dienst und die Privatwirtschaft sind
hier gleichermaßen gefordert.
4.7. Die Empfehlungen der European Charter for Researchers für early stage researchers
sollen umgesetzt werden.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
“Realising the European Higher Education Area”
Communiqué of the Conference of Ministers responsible for Higher Education, Berlin, 19 September 2003
28
“Realising the European Higher Education Area” Communiqué of the Conference of Ministers responsible for Higher Education, Berlin, 19 September 2003 http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/documents/
European Higher Education Area and European Research Area
– two pillars of the knowledge based society
Conscious of the need to promote closer links between the EHEA and the ERA in a Europe of
Knowledge, and of the importance of research as an integral part of higher education across Europe,
Ministers consider it necessary to go beyond the present focus on two main cycles of higher education
to include the doctoral level as the third cycle in the Bologna Process. They emphasise the importance
of research and research training and the promotion of interdisciplinarity in maintaining and
improving the quality of higher education and in enhancing the competitiveness of European higher
education more generally. Ministers call for increased mobility at the doctoral and postdoctoral levels
and encourage the institutions concerned to increase their cooperation in doctoral studies and the
training of young researchers.
Ministers will make the necessary effort to make European Higher Education Institutions an even
more attractive and efficient partner. Therefore Ministers ask Higher Education Institutions to
increase the role and relevance of research to technological, social and cultural evolution and to the
needs of society.
Ministers understand that there are obstacles inhibiting the achievement of these goals and these
cannot be resolved by Higher Education Institutions alone. It requires strong support, including
financial, and appropriate decisions from national Governments and European Bodies.
Finally, Ministers state that networks at doctoral level should be given support to stimulate the
development of excellence and to become one of the hallmarks of the European Higher Education
Area.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
Austrian law concerning the third cycle 29
Austrian law concerning the third cycle http://www.bmwf.gv.at/submenue/service/recht/universitaetsgesetz_2002/ http://ris.bka.gv.at
Bundesgesetz über die Organisation der Universitäten und ihrer Studien
(Universitätsgesetz 2002) in der Fassung des Bundesgesetzes BGBl. I Nr.
74/2006
§ 51 Abs. 2:
Z. 12. Doktoratsstudien sind die ordentlichen Studien, die der Weiterentwicklung der Befähigung zu
selbstständiger wissenschaftlicher Arbeit sowie der Heranbildung und Förderung des
wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchses auf der Grundlage von Diplom- und Masterstudien dienen.
Z. 13. Dissertationen sind die wissenschaftlichen Arbeiten, die anders als die Diplom- und
Masterarbeiten dem Nachweis der Befähigung zur selbstständigen Bewältigung wissenschaftlicher
Fragestellungen dienen.
Z. 14. Doktorgrade sind die akademischen Grade, die nach dem Abschluss der Doktoratsstudien
verliehen werden. Sie lauten „Doktorin ...“ oder „Doktor ...“, abgekürzt „Dr. ...“, mit einem im
Curriculum festzulegenden Zusatz, oder „Doctor of Philosophy“, abgekürzt „PhD“.
Z. 26. Der Umfang der Studien mit Ausnahme der Doktoratsstudien ist im Sinne des Europäischen
Systems zur Anrechnung von Studienleistungen (European Credit Transfer System – ECTS,
253/2000/EG, Amtsblatt Nr. L 28 vom 3. Februar 2000) in ECTS-Anrechnungspunkten56 anzugeben.
Mit diesen Anrechnungspunkten ist der relative Anteil des mit den einzelnen Studienleistungen
verbundenen Arbeitspensums zu bestimmen, wobei das Arbeitspensum eines Jahres 1 500
Echtstunden zu betragen hat und diesem Arbeitspensum 60 Anrechnungspunkte zugeteilt werden.
§ 54 Abs. 4:
Die Dauer von Doktoratsstudien beträgt mindestens drei Jahre. Das Studium darf als „Doctor of
Philosophy“-Doktoratsstudium bezeichnet und der akademische Grad „Doctor of Philosophy“,
abgekürzt „PhD“, verliehen werden.
§ 124 Abs. 15:
Ordentliche Studierende, die Doktoratsstudien betreiben, welche mit einem Arbeitsaufwand von
mindestens 120 ECTS-Anrechnungspunkten vor dem In-Kraft-Treten des § 54 Abs. 4 in der Fassung
des Bundesgesetzes BGBl. I Nr. 74/2006 eingerichtet wurden, sind berechtigt, diese Studien bis
längstens 30. September 2017 nach diesen Vorschriften abzuschließen. Ab dem Studienjahr 2009/10
darf eine Zulassung zu einem Doktoratsstudium, dessen Mindeststudiendauer weniger als drei Jahre
beträgt, nicht mehr erfolgen.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
Austrian law concerning the third cycle 30
§ 54 Abs. 4 (before the amendment BGBl. I Nr. 74/2006):
Der Arbeitsaufwand für Doktoratsstudien hat mindestens 120 ECTS-Anrechnungspunkte zu betragen.
Beträgt der Arbeitsaufwand mindestens 240 ECTS-Anrechnungspunkte, so darf das Studium als
„Doctor of Philosophy“-Doktoratsstudium bezeichnet und der akademische Grad „Doctor of
Philosophy“, abgekürzt „PhD“, verliehen werden.
3rd Forum European Higher Education Area Area Vienna, 19 September 2007
31
LINKS Austria: http://bologna.univie.ac.at (Bologna-Office, University of Vienna) http://www.bmwf.gv.at (Federal Ministry of Science and Research) http://www.reko.ac.at (Austrian Rectors’ Conference) Europe: http://www.eua.be (European University Association) http://www.eurodoc.net (European Council of Doctoral Candidates and Young Researchers) Bologna Process Websites: http://www.bologna2009benelux.org (2007-2009) http://www.dfes.gov.uk/londonbologna/ (2005-2007) http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/ (2003-2005) http://www.bologna-berlin2003.de/ (2001-2003)