IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eph/journl/v6y2011i1n8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bologna Process Trade –Offs. The Perception Of The Romanian Academic Staff

Author

Listed:
  • Alina Mihaela DIMA

    (Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest Piaţa Romană no. 6, Bucharest, Romania)

  • Constantin BRĂTIANU

    (Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest Piaţa Romană no. 6, Bucharest, Romania)

  • Daniel GLASER-SEGURA

    (Texas A&M University, San Antonio 1450 Gillete Blvd, San Antonio, TX 78224)

  • Kathleen VOGES

    (Texas A&M University, San Antonio 1450 Gillete Blvd, San Antonio, TX 78224)

Abstract

The Bologna process aims at creating a European Higher Education Area where inter-country mobility of students and staff, as well as workers holding a degree, is facilitated. While several aspects of the process deserve wide public support, others are less consensual. The paper checks the extent of academic staff confidence in the restructuring of higher education currently underway, by looking at its implications in Romania. Based on six open-ended interview questions of 29 faculty members in Romania, the results of our study identify central themes associated with this relevant stakeholder group’s perception of benefits and issues/challenges associated with the implementtation process. Most notably the themes of process planning, accreditation, lack of information, and unexpected results emerged as issues/challenges, while mobility, wider choice of programs, improved quality, and international standing were perceived as benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • Alina Mihaela DIMA & Constantin BRĂTIANU & Daniel GLASER-SEGURA & Kathleen VOGES, 2011. "Bologna Process Trade –Offs. The Perception Of The Romanian Academic Staff," Management & Marketing, Economic Publishing House, vol. 6(1), Spring.
    • Handle: RePEc:eph:journl:v:6:y:2011:i:1:n:8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.managementmarketing.ro/pdf/articole/215.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eph:journl:v:6:y:2011:i:1:n:8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Simona Vasilache (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.