THE BOLOGNA ACCORD

The Bologna Process launched the European Higher Education Area in 2010, in which students can choose from a wide and transparent range of high quality courses and benefit from smooth recognition procedures. The Bologna Declaration of June 1999 put in motion a series of reforms needed to make European Higher Education more compatible and comparable, more competitive and more attractive for Europeans and for students and scholars from other continents. Reform was needed then and reform is still needed today if Europe is to match the performance of the best performing systems in the world. It refers to a series of ministerial meetings and agreements between European countries designed to ensure comparability in the standards and quality of higher education qualifications. Through the Bologna Accords, the process has created the European Higher Education Area, in particular under the Lisbon Recognition Convention. It is named after the place it was proposed, the University of Bologna, with the signing in 1999 of the Bologna declaration by Education Ministers from 29 European countries. It was opened up to other countries signatory to the European Cultural convention, of the Council of Europe; further governmental meetings have been held in Prague (2001), Berlin (2003), Bergen (2005), London (2007), and Leuven (2009). Currently, it takes 12 years of basic education before Europeans become eligible to go to university. Higher education systems in these countries vary from country to country, but most of them basically offer degrees that are comparable to a bachelor's degree plus a master's degree in US-based systems. The minimum time it takes to a complete a degree in European universities is 5 years. However, in practice, it takes longer than that time because students usually take longer to complete their final theses, the absence of which disables them from getting the degree. So what happens is that with a longer time to finish the degree, the more likely it is for a student to drop out of the program. In Greece, students average about 7 to 8 years before they could get their first degrees. The Bologna Process currently has 47 participating countries.While the European Commission is an important contributor to the Bologna Process, the Lisbon Recognition Convention was prepared by the Council of Europe and members of the Europe Region of UNESCO. With the rapid unification of the European region as one political and economic entity, it is also rather surprising that it is the first region to drastically reform its higher education system in recent memory. This 2010, the implementation of the Bologna Accord will take place among many European countries, both EU and non-EU members. But what exactly is it? The Bologna Process was a major reform created with the claimed goal of providing responses to issues such as the public responsibility for higher education and research, higher education governance, the social dimension of higher education and research, and the values and roles of higher education and research in modern, globalized, and increasingly complex societies with the most demanding qualification needs.

Another goal of this accord is to create a European Higher Education Area by making the standards and quality control comparable and compatible across the continent. It took its name from the location of the first meeting discussing it, the University of Bologna, in 1999. It adapts the European Credit and Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS), with one credit equivalent to 30 hours of study. With this set-up, universities will be able to grant bachelor's degrees in 3 years, master's degrees in 2 years, and doctorates typically in 2 years. This means shorter time to get an undergraduate degree in Europe as well as a more compatible system between countries. In the Bucharest Communiqu, April 2012, the Ministers identified three key priorities - mobility, employability and quality, and emphasized the importance of higher education for Europe's capacity to deal with the economic crisis and to contribute to growth and jobs. Ministers also committed to making automatic recognition of comparable academic degrees a long-term goal of the European Higher Education Area. The Bucharest Communiqu builds on the Leuven Communiqu of 2009, which established priorities for 20102020: 1. Ensuring a quality higher education system 2. Adopting a two- or three-cycle system of study (BA, MA, PhD) 3. Promoting the mobility of students and academic and administrative staff 4. Introducing a credit system (ECTS) for the assessment of study performance 5. The Recognition of levels: adopting a system of easily identifiable and comparable levels 6. The Active involvement of higher education institutions, teachers and students in the Bologna Process and student participation in the management of higher education 7. Promoting a European dimension in higher education 8. Promoting the attractiveness of the European higher education area 9. Lifelong learning 10. A European higher education area and a European research area two pillars of a society based on knowledge With the Bologna Process implementation, higher education systems in European countries are to be organized in such a way that: It is easy to move from one country to the other (within the European Higher Education Area) for the purpose of further study or employment; The attractiveness of European higher education has increased, so that many people from non-European countries also come to study and/or work in Europe;

The European Higher Education Area provides Europe with a broad, high-quality advanced knowledge base, and ensures the further development of Europe as a stable, peaceful and tolerant community benefiting from a cutting-edge European Research Area;

There will also be a greater convergence between the U.S. and Europe as European higher education adopts aspects of the American system. The Bologna Accord also aims to facilitate mobility by providing common tools (such as the European Credit

Transfer and Accumulation System ECTS and the Diploma Supplement) to ensure that periods of study abroad are recognized. These tools are used to promote transparency in the emerging European Higher Education arena by allowing degree programs and qualifications awarded in one country to be understood in another.

An overarching structure (incorporating these elements) is being implemented through the development of national and European qualifications frameworks, which aim to provide a clearly defined system which is easy for students, institutions and employers to comprehend.

The European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS)

The ECTS is basically a standard for comparing the study achievement and performance of students in higher education across the EU and other collaborating European countries. An important tool used for credit transfer and accumulation, ECTS now plays an important part in curriculum design and in validating a range of learning achievements (academic or not). Under this system, credits reflect the total workload required to achieve the objectives of a program objectives which are specified in terms of the learning outcomes and competences to be acquired - and not just through lecture hours. It makes study programs easy to read and compare for all students, local and foreign, and therefore facilitates mobility and academic recognition.

The Diploma Supplement

Compulsory for every graduate (since 2005), the Diploma Supplement is a tool which is attached to a higher education diploma and describes the degrees qualification in an easily understandable way. It is designed to provide a standardized description of the nature, level, context, content and status of the studies that were successfully completed by the graduate. It is not a rsum or a substitute for the original credential, but rather a way of providing detailed information about any academic or professional qualification. Two basic degrees, bachelors and masters, have now been adopted by every participating country; sometimes in parallel to existing degrees during a transition period, sometimes replacing them completely. European universities are currently in the implementation phase, and an increasing number of graduates have now been awarded these new degrees. Typically, a bachelors degree requires 180 -240 ECTS credits and a masters program between 90 -120 ECTS credits depending on the discipline. This promotes a flexible approach in defining the length of both bachelors and

masters

programs.

The three overarching objectives of the Bologna process have been from the start: introduction of the three cycle system (bachelor/master/doctorate), quality assurance and recognition of qualifications and periods of study. The basic framework adopted is of three cycles of higher education qualifications . The framework of qualifications adopted by the ministers at their meeting in Bergen in 2005 defines the qualifications in terms of learning outcomes. These are statements of what students know and can do on completion of their degrees. In describing the cycles the framework makes use of the European (ECTS). It creates a more uniform HE system in the signatory countries with three cycles:

1st cycle: typically 180240 ECTS credits, usually awarding a bachelor's degree. The European Higher Education Area did
not introduce the Bachelor with Honors program, which allows graduates with a "BA hons." degree (e.g. in UK, USA, Canada) to undertake doctoral studies without first having to obtain a master's degree. Undergraduate leading to a Bachelor Degree.

2nd cycle: typically 90120 ECTS credits (a minimum of 60 on 2nd-cycle level). Graduate leading to masters degree. 3rd cycle: doctoral degree. No ECTS range given. Post graduate leading to the award of Doctorate.
In most cases, these will take 3, 2, and 3 years respectively to complete. The actual naming of the degrees may vary from country to country. Another format is the 4, 1 and 3 respectively. One academic year corresponds to 60 ECTS-credits that are equivalent to 1,5001,800 hours of study. Many participating countries have made substantial changes to their systems in response to the Bologna Accord. Introducing the new degrees has required a tremendous effort in reviewing curricula and expectations of students. Already, over half of European universities have reviewed their curricula entirely, using the Bologna reforms to implement a more student-focused approach and new quality procedures. What does this mean for many of us? The effects are still not heavily studied, but with the introduction of aspects of the American system in European universities, this only means that it becomes easier for students around the world to transfer to the continent for studying. Europe becomes a more attractive destination for overseas studies, which is a winwin situation for everyone. It raises the bar of competition, sure, because European first degrees are now granted in three years, as compared to the rest of us who usually take 4 years to finish. However it presents significant challenges including infrastructural change, administrative change and financing change. Differences between HE systems also resulted in a number of problems requiring resolution. These differences include secondary school duration and impact on future study path, access and selection mechanisms, existence or not of non-university higher education providers, range of study fees and student support mechanisms, calendar differences and structure, duration and type of final award. There are also issues in the implementation of this system including age at

graduation, program length, participation rates, completion rates, comparability and compatibility (regionally and globally), cost (national, institutional, personal), labor market relevance and labor market understanding. There are also a lot of uncertainties which exist for all stake holders.

To Students:
How many will graduate with bachelors? How many will continue to masters level? Will they change subject/school/country? Will this make European Education more attractive?

For Programs:
What will happen at the masters level? Will there be clarity positioning and funding? How will schools behave? Will conversion/bridging courses be required?

To employers:
Are bachelors graduates attractive? Are masters sought? How do employers view lifelong learning?

To Institutions:
What admissions criteria will be applied? Will students want to stay at the same institution? Are institutions ready to market to students, do they know how? Will all programs and institutions survive? Institutions, in addition, will face a number of opportunities and threats. These may involve the following: Larger potential student body Leverage experience o o o o o o Curriculum design Employer relations Qualification recognition and track record Quality Selection procedures Marketing know-how

Build strong brand and reputation higher Delver along multiple channels Proliferation of pre-experience masters

More players in MBA market MBA brand dilution Quality issues Positioning of Mater vs. MBA Harder to attract EU and Non-EU students This accord has also been criticized by many countries. These are the following:

Economic aspects
There is much skepticism and criticism of the Bologna Process from the side of academics. Thus Dr Chris Lorenz of the VU University has argued that: "The basic idea behind all educational EU-plans is economic: the basic idea is the enlargement of scale of the European systems of higher education ... in order to enhance its 'competitiveness' by cutting down costs. Therefore a Europe-wide standardization of the 'values' produced in each of the national higher educational systems is called for." Just as the World Trade Organization and GATS propose educational reforms that would effectively erode all effective forms of democratic political control over higher education, so "it is obvious that the economic view on higher education recently developed and formulated by the EU Declarations is similar to and compatible with the view developed by the WTO and by GATS."

Academic aspects
In much of continental Europe, the previous higher education system was modeled on the German system, in which there is a clear difference of vocational and academic higher education. This mostly has an impact on the old engineer's degrees. The conflation of the two types of degrees can be counterproductive in the following cases: The vocational three-year degrees are not intended for further study, so those students who also want to advance to a master's degree will be at a disadvantage. The master's degree effectively becomes the minimum qualification for a professional engineer, rather than the bachelor's degree. The academic three-year degrees prepare only for continuing towards master's, so students who enter the workforce at that point will not be properly prepared. Yet they would have the same academic title as the fully trained vocationally educated engineers. The end-result of the change is that the agreements between professional bodies will require reevaluation in some cases as qualifications change. The requirement of 60 ECTS per year assumes that 1,500 1,800 hours are available per year. However, the Bologna Process does not standardize semesters, which means that if the summer break at the university is long, the same material has to be crammed into a shorter study year. Also, there have been accusations that the same courses

have been simply redefined e.g. 1.5 times shorter when the local credits were converted to ECTS, with no change in course content or requirements. This effectively increases demands with nothing to compensate. The extent of this issue alone is such that in some countries, for example Norway, one ECTS point is defined as 20 hours study, while in The Netherlands, it is defined as 28 hours. These readily available definitions essentially prove that the "ECTS point" is not standard at all. It can readily be argued that a process that standardizes titles but not the content of the qualification creates a disadvantage for all candidates that take part in studies other than those requiring minimum effort, because their degrees have artificially been set equal to other qualifications that previously would have been judged on their own merits. Meanwhile, because of the differences between the philosophies and attitudes surrounding higher education in various countries the prescribed length of the study can mean different things in different states (or at different institutions within the same state, in fairness). In some countries, all candidates complete studies in the same time, with the better students potentially finishing sooner, while elsewhere, the "length" of the course is traditionally the shortest possible time to completion, unattainable by some, or even most as explained in the case of Finland below.

Other reforms as riders

The Bologna Process has been implemented concurrently with other reforms, which have been attached as "riders" to the implementation itself. These reforms go far beyond the minimum provisions necessary to implement the Bologna Process, and include introducing tuition fees, overhauling departments, and changing the organization of universities. These reforms have been criticized as unnecessary, detrimental to the quality of education, or even undemocratic. For example, in Finland, the official goal was to improve students' performance and to enable them to gain diplomas faster by introducing stricter standards. However, students appear to feel that the workload has increased, and the new standards lead to micromanaged and too narrow curricula. The Bologna Process is said to lead to universities being "diploma factories. Also, for example at Helsinki University of Technology, most students (85%) fail to achieve the official goal of 120 credits in two years the average is 81 credits. The number of students failing to achieve the minimum credits to receive student benefit has risen 40% following the implementation of the Process.

Effects by state
The Bologna Process constitutes an intergovernmental agreement, between both EU and non-EU countries. Therefore, it does not have the status of EU legislation. Also, as the Bologna Declaration is not a treaty or convention, there are no legal obligations for the signatory states. The (extent of) participation and cooperation is completely voluntary. Although the Bologna Declaration was created outside and without the EU institutions, the European Commission plays an increasingly important role in the implementation of the Process. The Commission has supported several European projects (the Tuning project, the TEEP project) connected to quality assurance etc. Most countries do not

currently fit the framework instead they have their own time-honored systems. The Process will have many knock-on effects such as bilateral agreements between countries and institutions which recognize each other's degrees. However, the Process is now moving away from a strict convergence in terms of time spent on qualifications, towards a competency-based system. The system will have an undergraduate and postgraduate division, with a bachelor's degree in the former and a master's and doctorate in the latter. In mainland Europe five-year plus first degrees are common. This leads to many not completing their studies; many of these countries are now introducing bachelor-level qualifications. This situation is changing rapidly as the Bologna Process is implemented. Depending on the country and the development of its higher education system, some introduced ECTS, discussed their degree structures and qualifications, financing and management of higher education, mobility programs etc. At the institutional level the reform involved higher education institutions, their faculties or departments, student and staff representatives and many other actors. The priorities varied from country to country and from institution to institution. On the other hand, Isagani Cruz, a critic, playwright, publisher, educator, biographer, fiction writer, and TV host ISAGANI R. CRUZ is an officer or member of many professional organizations, have also commented about the Bologna Accord with regards to the Philippines. In his article he stated the following: The Bologna Process may not be proceeding as smoothly as its 47 European member countries wish it would (they missed their 2010 deadline for full implementation), but it certainly is, as Clifford Adelman of the US Institute for Higher Education Policy said recently, the most far reaching and ambitious reform of higher education ever undertaken. It is still a work in progress, but as it has attracted both considerable attention and imitation of some of its features by former colonial countries in Latin America, Africa, Southeast Asia, and Australia, it has sufficient momentum to become the dominant global higher education model within the next two decades. The Chronicle of Higher Education reported last May 12 that representatives from the three governments [of China, Japan, and South Korea] met in Tokyo last Friday [and] agreed to explore credit transfers, exchange programs, and quality control in universities across the region. Earlier, the Asia-Pacific Quality Network (APQN) launched a similar process for our region. There is no doubt that we Filipinos have to take the Bologna Process very seriously. What does the Bologna Process mean for our schools? I shall list some actions that the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) and our Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have to take if we want to be in step with the rest of the world. We have to expand the system of specifying Minimum Learning Competencies or Standards used by DepEd to include HEIs & CHED. Elementary and high school teachers are used to outcomes-based instruction, because they talk about competencies all the time. These competencies are used not just for preparing textbooks and teacher-training sessions, but for preparing lesson plans for individual classes. In contrast, college teachers have general objectives, often not even couched in psychomotor, cognitive, or affective terms, for courses that are usually planned and taught independently of each other. The much-misunderstood constitutional right to academic freedom is often used to justify a lack of clear and articulated focus on what a student is really supposed to learn in a particular lesson or course.

We have to include both content and skills in student learning standards. Falling into the either-or trap of saying that we need either information or process (transmissive versus transformative teaching) is no longer excusable today. There are bits of information that every student needs to memorize (sometimes called Cultural Literacy or Core Knowledge), as well as processes of learning that the student needs to internalize (sometimes misunderstood as the whole of Constructivism). We have to specify learning outcomes, levels of challenge, competencies, and student workload. DepEd specifies the first three, but not the fourth; CHED needs to start pushing for all four. The most difficult of these is student workload. The Bologna Process is student-centered, and what we call units or credits are computed not according to how many hours the teacher is in the classroom, but how many hours the student takes to study a subject, whether inside or outside the classroom. We have to include graduates and employers in curriculum and syllabus development. Some HEIs already do this, particularly those run by administrators with business backgrounds, but all HEIs should do this. In the Bologna Process, education is demand-driven; schools have to comply with what the future employers of their graduates require. Administrators and teachers should not determine learning goals; employers should. This is the most controversial issue in Europe today. Many teachers and students do not want education to be commercialized or beholden to industry. Unfortunately for traditionalists and purists, most students today do not pay tuition to push the frontiers of knowledge or to challenge received wisdom; they invest the money of their parents to buy pieces of paper that will get them jobs. We have to include faculty of other universities when we revise the curriculum and syllabuses of our own university. Cooperation is a major goal of the Bologna Process. Fortunately, we are ahead of Europe in this regard. We have had consortiums of various kinds for some time now. Nevertheless, we still have a lot to do to ensure inter-HEI comparability (another key term in the Bologna Process). A student taking Freshman English 1 in one HEI, for example, should be able to do whatever another student can do at the end of the same subject in another HEI. To ensure that outcomes are comparable if not identical, teachers from other HEIs should be included in the curriculum committees of an HEI. We have to ensure that undergraduates can evaluate recent research and that masters these s represent original research. The Bologna Process raises the bar on research and education. What we usually require undergraduates to do is to know what is going on in a field, not to criticize the latest developments in a field. We usually require that of masters students, who have to do a Review of the Literature for their theses. The Bologna Process says that our masters students should be doing what our doctoral students currently doing, namely, are working at the cutting edge of their field. Masters theses should be what our doctoral dissertations are now. We have to think in terms of student load, not faculty load. One of the key items in the Bologna Process is the European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS), defined as the wor kload students need in order to achieve expected learning outcomes. Learning outcomes describe what a learner is expected to know, understand and be able to do after successful completion of a process of learning. They relate to level descriptors in national and European qualifications frameworks.

For example, if a student, per week, takes 3 hours to listen to a teacher in a classroom, another 3 hours to read an assigned text in a library, and another 3 hours to write a term paper at home, the student should get 9 hours credits for the subject, not 3 units as in our current system. The 3 units that students get in our system are computed not according to the students time, but according to the teachers time. In other words, our administrative system is teachercentered rather than student-centered. Of course, there is a problem. A bright student could take only 1 hour to read an assigned text and only 1 hour to work on a paper, while a dumb student could take 5 hours to read and 5 hours to write. Clearly, it is impossible to figure out what the workload is for an average or typical student. This is one reason ECTS has not really been implemented very much nor very well in Europe. Nevertheless, we really should start thinking in terms of students rather than teachers. This will be a major paradigm shift for many administrators, who usually spend more time with faculty rather than students. We should start thinking of assigning different credits for subjects that are not equivalent to each other in terms of workloads. For example, hard or major subjects require more time on the part of students than easy or minor subjects. Perhaps teachers of major subjects should be paid more than teachers of minor subjects. (I can hear the howls of protest, not from teachers of major subjects, but from teachers of General Education or GE subjects.) We have to find a way out of the rigid grid of one-hour three-times-a-week courses. The three-hours per week allotment for most subjects is one of the most change-resistant of education practices. Teachers that demand more time or need less time for their subjects often get dirty looks from administrators, who have to think in terms of pay per hour. How, for example, do you pay a teacher who teaches one hour one week, two hours the next week, five hours the third week, and so on, depending on the complexity of the lesson? If there is only one teacher, we can always go on a case-by-case basis (in Philippine English, case-to-case), but if all teachers demand flexible times, no administrator can administrate. We have to have three years worth of major subjects. This is the most dramatic of changes required of us by the Bologna Process. Except for those taking professional courses such as engineering and accounting, our college students get only two years of specialized or major courses. The first two years of a four-year college course are taken up mostly by GE subjects. Once basic education is extended by two years, however, most if not all these GE subjects will be taken up in high school, thus freeing the college years for more major subjects. Clearly, CHEDs technical panels have their work cut out for them. It takes at least two years to have a new curriculum conceptualized and accepted by all stakeholders (particularly since we should now include graduates and employers in the curriculum development process). The time to start is right now. We have to give students a Diploma Supplement in addition to a Diploma and a Transcript of Records. Bologna requires all universities to specify what a student has actually learned to do, not just to indicate the students grades or degrees. The idea is for employers to know, just from reading a Supplement, what the graduate is qualified to do. We have to have a discipline-specific Qualifications Framework statement. We have to list the qualifications (competencies or skills) that every subject in every major course guarantees about a student. For example, can a student who passes English 3 already become a call center agent without further training? If not, which subject can

promise this qualification? If no subject or course in college guarantees this, why are graduates encouraged to apply to call centers? We have to identify the jobs that a student with the degree is qualified to do. The hardest thing for many departments to do will be to identify the specific jobs their graduates are qualified for. Engineers obviously can be engineers and nurses can be nurses, but what is the job that a business or humanities major is particularly prepared for that nobody else can do? We have to match degrees with industry needs. The bottom line is removing the gap between education and industry. Our famous mismatch but definitely not all our education problems will be solved once we take the Bologna Process seriously.

Comment:
The Bologna Accord has its goals that will be very helpful to improve the educational system not only in the European countries, but especially, of our country. There are a lot of advantages that it has which will aid in our educations advancement and development to meet ht demands of the industry. The features of this new system that I consider advantageous are the following: DIPLOMA SUPPLEMENT This will be helpful to both the new graduate individual and employer, because this provides information about the degrees qualification in easily understandable way. Since it provides a description of status of the studies that were successfully completed by an individual, it will be easy for an employer to know what one can do.

MOBILITY Since the system of education in the participating countries will be standardized and will have uniformity, it will be easy to move from one country to the other for the purpose of studying or employment. Nowadays, we all know that most Filipinos want to go abroad to work and earn a larger amount of compensation. However, the system of education in our country mismatches the educational system with that of other countries. This results to the underemployment of our workers when they work abroad. If we will participate or adopt this system of education which is called Bologna Accord, it will be easy for most of us to transfer from one country to another and it also facilitates academic recognition.

STUDENT-ORIENTED One of the main objectives of this accord is to adopt ECTS (European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System) which reflects the total workload required to achieve the objectives of program- objectives which are specified in terms of the learning outcomes and competencies to be acquired. Students became the main subject and concern wherein their

leaning is the priority, whether they are outside or inside the school. The goal here is the life-long learning of each studentwhich must be the aim of every educational system and institution.

DEMAND-DRIVEN One of the reasons why we study is to acquire job, aside from acquiring knowledge and skills to be used in our lives. But for us to be productive in the job we have, we must be able to respond to the demands living within it. For us to be able to do it, at the time of schooling, students must be oriented and trained parallel and congruent to the demands and needs of our society and economy. This is one of the falsehoods that our country is having at the present times. Most of our leaders were turning their attention in making our country technological and industrial, when in fact, Philippines is an agricultural country. I think it will also be good for us to train our people in the agricultural works since these are the resources available in our country. Bien industrial is not bad at all, especially it is the way to get along with globalization, but on the contrary, we must not neglect what we have right now to help us to attain progress. However there are also some disadvantages in this accord. These are the following: THE FIRST FORMAT OF THE THREE CYCLES I am not in favor with the first format of the three cycle in the Bologna accord which is consisted of three (3) years in studying to get a Bachelors Degree, two (2) years in order to have a Masters degree and (3) years for a Doctorate Degree. If we will have only three years of studying at a bachelors degree level, our students will not be prepared enough for the workforce, since it is a very short period to specialize and train in a particular field. In addition, it seems that bachelors degree is just a preparation to study at the Masters degree level.

ECTS I will be not easy to determine how long a typical student will learn a material in view of the fact that students have differencesin learning styles and approaches, as well as their level of intelligence. This feature of Bologna Accord is quite complicated since they did not provide standard timeframe of a particular semester but they expect that every individual coming from different higher educational institution will acquire the same knowledge and skill regardless of the timeframe which a university has. Moreover, I agree with what Isagani Cruz commented, we should start thinking in terms of students rather than teachers. I our college educational system, we should really be studying our major subjects for a longer time rather than having it equal with the time we study our minor subjects. Since we are already in the K to 12 Curriculum, some of the General Education subjects will be taken for sure. So in college, it would be better if the first year will be spent in studying GE subjects, and the second to fourth years for the major/hard subjects for our students to be rigidly and properly trained so when they came out to the institution, they are already equipped with the proper knowledge and skills.

In general, I find Bologna Accord helpful and productive, but critical and analytical measures must be taken first and we must really take it seriously, as commented by Isagani Cruz. The issues must be discussed and settled first if we were to implement it in our educational system.

Psychological and Sociological Foundations of Education

Submitted By: Carla Joyce B. Navarrete BBTE 3-1