Reform of the Italian University Educational System and Evolution of Selected Characteristics of Its Graduates (2000-2009)

none1noThe harmonisation of university educational systems at a European level has experienced a boost since the late 1990s with the implementation of the so-called “Bologna Process”, which had the aim to introduce a more transparent and comparable system of university degrees, fostering mobility of students and scholars, assuring educational quality and placing emphasis on the European dimension of higher education. The first of these objectives has been pursued, in Italy, by organising the curricula in two main cycles: a first cycle (upon completion of which a bachelor’s-level degree is obtained) geared to the employment market and lasting (at least) three years; and a second cycle (leading to a master’s-level degree) conditional upon the completion of the first cycle. In Italy, the Bologna Declaration has had considerable impact in terms of reform of the Italian university system, in particular with regard to curricula. It should be pointed out that Italy, before the start of the Bologna Process, was one of those few countries involved in the Process which did not have a two-cycle type degree structure. The implementation of the Bologna Process in Italy was based on the so-called “3+2” system: a two-cycle degree structure consisting of a first-level (a three-year bachelor’s-type degree – or laurea) and a second-level (a two-year master’s-type degree – laurea specialistica including those obtained for a first-level degree), with some programmes maintaining a five/six-year single-cycle, replacing the programmes of the old university system lasting at least four years. The “3+2” reform was also aimed at achieving some specific “convergence” goals which were not expressly mentioned in the Bologna Declaration, including the addressing of the following endemic weaknesses of the Italian university system: low numbers of graduates; high university drop-out rates; strong discrepancy between the allocated time-to-graduation and the actual duration of studies. The “3+2” solution has generated a fast and partly uncontrolled increase in educational provision, and the reform led a higher number of young and older adults to start university studies. However, the reform process and the dynamics of the university system have proved to be slow and sticky, and its effects late in emerging, especially with regard to the characteristics of graduates, who are the “final product” of university educational processes. This is a key factor in explaining the limited availability and nature of existing data on graduates and the need to avoid drawing hurried conclusions, even though almost a decade has passed since the reform was introduced. Transition has been achieved only recently (three-year programmes) or is still in an on-going process (single-cycle programmes; second-level programmes). The prior system’s programmes have continued and still continue to produce a significant number of graduates (who clearly have different characteristics than the graduates of the late 1990s); single-cycle and second-level programmes have started to produce significant numbers of graduates only over the last few years. Furthermore, the first cohorts of “new” graduates are atypical for at least two reasons. First of all, the ability of some students to successfully complete their studies within a shorter time period is probably associated with their better-than-average “quality” in terms of background, motivation and access to resources. Secondly, the first cohorts of “new” graduates also included individuals who achieved graduation because they transferred from pre-reform programmes to postreform ones, or because they applied for accreditation of previous study or work activities for purposes of degree completion. The empirical framework and the possibility to perform reasonable comparisons are further complicated if we also take into account the fact that the majority of three-year degree holders tend to pursue postgraduate education (rather than entering the labo...openG. GasperoniG. Gasperon