Search

The paper provides a descriptive account of recent changes in Italian higher education policy, focusing in particular on the impact that recent reforms have had on the internal governance of the nation’s universities. The paper shows how the government’s policy of reform (which is currently moving away from the traditional “command and control” approach to a “steering from a distance” policy) risks being either ineffective or attaining its goals too slowly due to the persistence of deeply rooted, previous institutional governance practices. The greater autonomy currently enjoyed by universities is managed in a corporatistic-oligarchic decision-making style, which leads to sluggish distributive outputs and institutional adaptation to external changes. The paper provides empirical evidence of this institutional inconsistency. In an attempt to deal with this problem, there have been discussions and debate in recent years about re-designing the institutional arrangement of universities, even though it is unlikely that any coherent decisions will be taken on this matter, due to the intractability of the problem resulting from a series of political, cultural and social factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

At the crossroads of current innovation policies towards a European Research Area (ERA) and a European Higher Education Area (EHEA) lies an important province of higher learning and research: doctoral training and the further careers of PhD graduates. A considerable number of higher education systems across Europe shift their paradigms for doctoral training away from the traditional so-called Humboldtian model towards the so-called professional model. On this background, the paper discusses (1) the German pattern of a strong link of the PhD to the labor market outside academe that is based on a traditional academic-disciplinary mode of apprenticeship training, and (2) approaches that argue for a new mode of knowledge production replacing an academic-disciplinary model of research training by a hybrid model that crosses disciplinary and organizational borders. The paper argues that a diversity of organisational and structural forms as well as different validation criteria and procedures will probably determine the future face of research training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A major element in the creation of the European area of higher education is the adoption of a common structure of degrees, implying in several countries the reduction of the duration of the first degree to 3 years, which is a controversial change. Cardoso et al. (CESifo Econ Stud 54(2): 229–247, ) have analyzed student confidence in the curricula change, quantifying its impact on students’ first choices of academic programs. This paper goes two steps further. First, it concentrates on a variable that better translates total demand for an academic program, namely the total number of students who place the program among their six revealed preferences, instead of just the first option; and, second, an econometric model that better fits the data is estimated. Results confirm a positive impact of the Bologna process on the demand for programs, which varies with program size and across fields of study. Our results complement those in Cardoso et al. (), as they uncover that being a program leader, i.e. the only institution in the country that restructured a given program, was associated with higher demand by prospective students, which nevertheless stemmed from their “second best" options and not from their first choices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]