Qui pilote le processus de Bologne ?

Abstract

Résumé Le processus de Bologne n’était initialement conduit que par les États. À partir de 2001, il a intégré les représentants d’organisations fédérant les étudiants, les universités, les écoles supérieures, le Conseil de l’Europe et la Commission européenne. Parce qu’elles ont été instituées partenaires, ces instances ont dû s’entendre sur des questions qui les divisaient traditionnellement, ce qui a contribué à faire évoluer leurs rapports sur les scènes nationales. La Commission européenne, qui avait été exclue du processus par ses initiateurs soucieux de protéger la souveraineté des États, tend aujourd’hui à le contrôler. Partant de l’hypothèse selon laquelle le processus de Bologne ouvre un espace de jeu de coopération-compétition, cet article suggère que la Commission a été intégrée aux instances de pilotage du processus parce qu’elle a eu les moyens de soutenir les pays et leurs universités dans toutes les facettes de leurs stratégies et de les rendre interdépendants dans un espace européen de l’enseignement supérieur qu’ils sont amenés à promouvoir, même si ce n’est souvent que dans le discours.

How and Why the European Commission Has Acquired the Right to Vote in a Europeanization Process in a Field of National Competency

“…Their refusal to divide their studies cycles in a model of 3-5-8 1 (Croché 2006) and to agree on common criteria for quality evaluation clearly indicate their resistance to harmonizing their systems completely at a European level. This reflects a real concern within some countries for national sovereignty and control over their own higher education systems (Charlier 2006).…”

“…At The Bologna process presents a new sociopolitical space in higher education (Croché 2006). In this framework circulate actors (diverse organizations), people, ideas, and words that are progressively integrated in everyday language and, by being incorporated little by little in linguistic repertories, make the idea of economic efficiency of higher education and the adoption of utilitarian perspectives by European universities seem natural.…”

“…The budget that the Commission can mobilize completes the national budgets. They are put to the service of policies whose daily constraints divert universities, the conquest of new markets, or the construction of transnational alliances, which demand important financial and human investment (Croché 2006).…”

Occupational Licensing Versus Company-Led Training

“…Until then, the Commission had achieved mutual recognition only for a series of liberal professions and after considerable difficulties (Orzack 1983;Berggreen-Merkel 1999). A new approach, the 'Bologna process', was launched by some of the European governments in 1998 with a view to standardizing some of the basic European higher educational institutions, but the Member States of the Union systematically thwarted the Commission's efforts to establish itself as the coordinator of this movement (Croché 2006). Moreover, at vocational training level, the Commission had experienced a chain of defeats.…”

Universities and standardization instruments: the willingness to put an end to the organized anarchy

“…These instruments aims to constraint the responsible of the countries members of the Bologna Process to reform their system by integrating the Bologna prescriptions. They are integrated in an "apparatus (in Foucault's sense) of higher education normalization" (see Croché, 2010). The power of the apparatus is due to the fact that prescriptive messages are sent to all the facets of the organization and of management of the higher education establishments.…”