http://www.goethe.de/wis/fut/uhs/en4681040.htm
The objective of the Bologna process is to create a common European Higher Education Area, and bachelor and master's degree courses have meanwhile been introduced at German universities throughout the country. It is as yet unclear how the new degrees are viewed on the international labour market. However, those who are keen to uphold the Humboldt ideal of the university – that is to say, a place where teaching and research are closely interlinked – and who vehemently reject imposing school-like regulations on university teaching, refuse to be silent.
In October 2008, the theologian Marius Reiser, since 1991 a new testament professor at the Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz, resigned his chair in protest against the changes at the universities. With effect from 1 April 2009, he was dismissed from the civil service.
Teaching of knowledge versus independent scholarly insight?
Universities represent the pinnacle of the educational system. As such, they should provide the highest possible level of education. What is more, they should guide students towards science and research. Naturally, not all students can be made into researchers. However, it is at least possible to teach all of them the difference between school knowledge and scholarly work.
What are your main points of criticism of the Bologna reform?
That it blurs precisely this distinction. As one can read for oneself everywhere, the Bologna process is all about the teaching of knowledge – in other words about giving students basic knowledge and an overview of a subject. Everything is aimed at vocational training, universities providing the knowledge that the students will later need in their jobs.
But is that not a good thing?
In teacher training courses in particular, the communication of knowledge has always been at least a secondary objective of a university education. The main objective, however, was for students to be introduced to academic and scientific work, and for them to develop their own personalities, including the ability to think and work independently. It was not a matter of providing readymade overview knowledge. Students learnt by example how to work things out for themselves and how researchers acquire new knowledge.
Less mobility than before
I believe that there is no-one who really wishes for standardization. Surely what we want is a diverse university landscape in which every discipline is slightly different at each university, depending on which professors work there and where they each place their individual focus.
Mobility has nothing to do with this standardization, unless the aim is in fact to make all universities exactly the same, give them the same equipment, and have them all teach the same contents. If this were the case, incidentally, professors would no longer be needed at all: students from higher years, after all, are perfectly capable of reading out textbooks.
Has more mobility in fact been achieved?
On the contrary. To all intents and purposes, bachelor students can no longer switch from one university to another before graduating. This is because the curriculum is so rigid and over-regulated that such a move is simply not feasible. The precise content and presentation of the modules, after all, is different at all universities, yet students cannot afford to lose a semester by changing universities.
Yes to reforms, but no to a new system
No, I cannot see anything positive about it at all. People keep saying that in the past we had far too much freedom in many subjects, and that students had problems finding their way. It is certainly true that the old system was in need of reform, and a more structured approach should indeed have been followed in some subjects. For example, it would have made sense to introduce an intermediate exam for students undergoing teaching training degree programmes. These necessary reforms, however, would have been easily possible in the old system.
What will be the reform's long-term consequences for universities?
In the long term, it will turn universities into schools. And because all that a school really needs is a collection of textbooks, our university libraries will hardly be used any longer in future. You will find the odd person there who is still mad enough to want to carry on researching, but most students will no longer have the time.
conducted the interview. She works as a freelance journalist in Bonn.
Translation: Chris Cave
Copyright: Goethe-Institut e. V., Online-Redaktion
June 2009
Any questions about this article? Please write to us!
