On March 1, 2022, the EUA hosted a webinar entitled Women in academia: breaking the glass ceiling or rebuilding the house?  In the U.S., we have often talked about the glass ceiling(s) and thus, I was intrigued by the notion of ‘rebuilding the house” which I believe is the path to follow.  Although ‘breaking the glass ceiling’ is still important, I would encourage efforts that take on the system (the house) and rebuild it to be more inclusive, welcoming, and affirming.

Prior to the webinar, the EUA published a report in November 2019 which provided an overview of inclusion and diversity at 159 higher education institutions in 36 European systems and provided the foundation for university leadership to develop and implement strategies to build more inclusive higher education. The webinar presentations and discussion were mostly about women in academia including those in leadership positions in Europe. The panelists provided an update on demographic data and interactive website, and strove to address the following questions: Is gender parity now a reality in academia? Are more women from all backgrounds taking on leadership positions in academia? How can academia benefit from this cultural change?

The panelists shared detailed information about women in European higher education, offered their reflections on women in academia and their journey to leadership, and shared some strategies for change. The panelists and links to their presentations included:

• Annick Castiaux, Rector, University of Namur, Belgium (narrative about her journey into academic leadership – see YouTube recording)
• Mina Stareva, Head of Sector – Gender, DG Research and Innovation, European Commission
• Ella Ghosh, Senior Advisor at the Committee for Gender Balance and Diversity in Research (KIF), Norway
• Kathrin Müller, project manager, U-Multirank, Germany
• Kamila Kozirog, Policy & Project Officer, EUA
• Thomas Jørgensen, Senior Policy Coordinator, EUA

The webinar and the handouts are available on the EUA website and YouTube Channel. On this topic and others (open science, inclusion, teaching/learning), the EUA has made tremendous progress over the past 20+ years of its existence and nations around the world, including the U.S., should take note and learn from their experiences.

Although the focus of the webinar was about women in academia, there was also some mention of others who tend to be marginalized from and within academia. From my perspective, inclusion of this kind will need rebuilding of the system and will require systemic change.

Toward the end of the webinar, the issue of work-life balance arose and was quickly identified primarily as for women (and men) around child care. The notion of work-life balance also applied to elder care. In the U.S., we have had these discussions and have expanded these work-life balance efforts however they are so named but they are still mostly situated from the gender perspective. Work-life initiatives should be expanded beyond the notion of work life balance routinely beyond gender and family responsibilities to include others experiencing work-life disruption due to personal crisis and individual challenges such as disability, mental and physical health, and even social injustices.  At the Virginia Tech Graduate School, the work-life assistance program also started with female graduate students for birth and adoption and expanded to include male graduate students within a couple of years.  More recently, the program was expanded to include what we called significant life events (e.g., elder care, family or personal crisis, death).

Shall we break the glass ceiling or rebuild the house? We must change the system and rebuild the house.

In 2018, the European Commission (EC) began the process of developing a funding program for research and innovation for the European Union (EU) that would continue funding beyond Horizon 2020. The efforts resulted in Horizon Europe, EU Research and Innovation program 2021-2027, with a budget of €95.5 billion. The focus of Horizon Europe is to facilitate collaboration and strengthen the impact of research and innovation in tackling global challenges (e.g.,climate change, UN’s Sustainable Development goals) and increase EU competitiveness through an enhanced European Research Area.

Through Horizon Europe, the European Commission has demonstrated a strong commitment to research and innovation in Europe but only EU members can apply and receive funding.  That excludes Switzerland and the United Kingdom who are not members of the EU.  According to Jan Palmowski (2022), Secretary-General at The Guild of European Research-Intensive Universities, the importance of Swiss and UK Association to HorizonEurope has been strongly articulated by researchers, science organisations and university rectors across Europe and has resulted in the #SticktoScience campaign trending in Twitter and social media at the moment.

#SticktoScience calls for an open and inclusive European Research Area urges The EU, the UK and Switzerland to rapidly reach association agreements so that the two countries can contribute scientifically and financially to the strength of Horizon Europe. This is a very important topic and hopefully will be resolved soon.

in 2010, I was invited to speak at the European University Association – Council on Doctoral Education (EUA-CDE) conference in Berlin on a panel on doctoral education in U.S. and Europe. The 2010 report which included the update to the original Salzburg principles (2005) had just been released and these guided my comments comparing U.S. and European doctoral education.  The ten Salzburg principles included the following:

• The core component of doctoral training is the advancement of knowledge through original research. At the same time it is recognized that doctoral training must increasingly meet the needs of an employment market that is wider than academia.
• Embedding in institutional strategies and policies:universities as institutions need to assume responsibility for ensuring that the doctoral programmes and research training they offer are designed to meet new challenges and include appropriate professional career development opportunities.
• The importance of diversity: the rich diversity of doctoral programmes in Europe – including joint doctorates – is a strength which has to be underpinned by quality and sound practice.
• Doctoral candidates as early stage researchers: should be recognized as professionals – with commensurate rights – who make a key contribution to the creation of new knowledge.
• The crucial role of supervision and assessment: in respect of individual doctoral candidates, arrangements for supervision and assessment should be based on a transparent contractual framework of shared responsibilities between doctoral candidates, supervisors and the institution (and where appropriate including other partners).
• Achieving critical mass: Doctoral programmes should seek to achieve critical mass and should draw on different types of innovative practice being introduced in universities across Europe, bearing in mind that different solutions may be appropriate to different contexts and in particular across larger and smaller European countries. These range from graduate schools in major universities to international, national and regional collaboration between universities.
• Duration: doctoral programmes should operate within an appropriate time duration (three to four years full- time as a rule).
• The promotion of innovative structures: to meet the challenge of interdisciplinary training and the development of transferable skills.
• Increasing mobility: Doctoral programmes should seek to offer geographical as well as interdisciplinary and intersectoral mobility and international collaboration within an integrated framework of cooperation between universities and other partners.
• Ensuring appropriate funding: the development of quality doctoral programmes and the successful completion by doctoral candidates requires appropriate and sustainable funding

In identifying the Salzburg principles, the European University Association (EUA) signaled specific focus on doctoral education across the European universities and its critical components. The topics addressed in these principles are quite similar to components of doctoral education in the United States and issues for doctoral education needed for the 21st century. One of the significant results of the Salzburg principles was the development of Doctoral Colleges and the concept of graduate campuses at European Universities. Graduate Schools have long existed in the U.S., doctoral schools/colleges is a new concept but one that has helped facilitate change in doctoral education in Europe.

Conversations about doctoral education and doctoral education reform in Europe and U.S. have continued in the last 10 years.  Today there are more commonalities and convergence about doctoral education than throughout history. In 2018, the publication of two significant reports has provided a lens into the evolving PhD education: Graduate STEM education in the 21st century (NASEM, 2018) and Doctoral Education in Europe Today (EUA, 2019).

The report entitled Graduate STEM Education for the 21st Century (2018) was published by the U.S. National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM). The report included the identification of core competences for the Master’s and PhD degrees and recommendations for 21st century universities.  Although the report focuses on STEM programs, the competencies and recommendations apply more broadly to graduate education beyond STEM.  The core competencies for the ideal PhD degree fall into the following two broad categories: (a) Develop Scientific and Technological Literacy and Conduct Original Research and (b) Develop Leadership, Communication, and Professional Competencies

During this same time period, the EUA-CDE conducted a survey of European universities about doctoral education throughout Europe.  The survey of doctoral education was based upon the Salzburg principles and designed to collect data in the following areas:

The EUA-CDE doctoral education report includes data on the topics above and resulted in the identification of strategic priorities for European doctoral education moving forward.  The strategic priorities included the following:

• Funding for doctoral students
• Ethics and scholarly integrity
• Attracting students from abroad
• Career development
• Gender equality
• Open access/open science
• Health/wellbeing of doctoral candidates
• Increasing number of doctoral candidates
• University-business cooperation
• Societal engagement of doctoral candidates

As shown in the figure above, the top three strategic priorities for universities in Europe were funding for doctoral students, ethics and attracting students from abroad.  For more information about the findings, recommendations and suggested actions, see the report.

In addition to these specific doctoral education topics and priorities, universities in Europe and the U.S. continue to explore evolving issues facing the 21st century university.  Among these are focus on teaching/learning, diversity and equity, open access, innovation and entrepreneurship, technology, academic freedom and accessibility.  Changes in doctoral education are critical for the 21st century university and doctoral colleges/graduate schools can help lead the path forward.

References.

Doctoral education in Europe today: Approaches and institutional structures (2019).  European University Association

Graduate STEM education for the 21st century (2019).  National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM).

Salzburg Principles II Recommendations (2010).  European University Association (EUA).

For nearly two decades now I have been actively engaged with higher education around the world (which provided the impetus for the establishment of the Global Perspectives Program).  I have watched with great interest the emergence of the  Bologna Process in Europe in 1999 and now the extension of the Bologna process for another 10 years.  Universities around the world have been and are challenged to become 21st century universities and this requires change.  There is no need to abandon the rich history of many universities, but change requires colleges and universities to rethink the who, how, where, when and even the why of higher education.

Universities around the world are grappling with a number of issues, many of which are local or national.  These often differ by country, institutional structure, political climate, financial constraints and more.  Recently, I have noticed that many European universities with the encouragement of the European University Association (EUA) are embracing some of the timely topics which are also lively topics within the United States.  And these will inform the discussion of the participants during our journey known as #GPPVT18.

This is year 13 for the VT Graduate School Future Professoriate: Global Perspectives program (GPP) in Switzerland. Thirteen years and it seems like yesterday when I flew to Zurich to initiate the program.  It is truly amazing how time passes so quickly and how much the program has evolved.

Although we visit the same countries (Switzerland, France, Italy) and the same universities in those countries, the same hotels and even some of the same restaurants, the experiences are different due to the GPP participants and the new places and people within the universities we visit. This year there are 13 graduate students traveling plus the GPP Graduate Assistant Abram and me. Abram was a participant last year and has switched roles for #GPPVT18. The participants come from 13 different degree programs located in five different colleges (4 from Liberal Arts and Human Sciences, 3 from Agriculture and Life Sciences, 3 from Engineering, 2 from Science).  The diversity of academic disciplines, lived experiences, social identities and perspectives is rich and serves to enhance the experience.  I look forward to meeting up with the group at Hotel St. Josef on Sunday, May 27th at 15.00 (3 pm).

Each year we identify a theme which focuses our attention on trends, challenges and issues facing higher education in Europe especially Switzerland.  This year’s theme is “Evolving European and U.S. higher education”.  The GPP’18 participants will explore four timely topic areas (teaching/learning, open access, inclusion/diversity and doctoral education) during the university visits, engage in group dialogue at the GPP summit in Riva San Vitale, and ultimately at the global seminar at the Embassy of Switzerland in Washington D.C. in June.  The exploration of these topics will be invigorating and the dialogue rich.

Check out the website (futureprof.global), read our blogs, and follow up on twitter (#gppvt18).