More articles from Volume 3, Issue 2, 2014
PhD competences of food studies
Peer-teaching in the food chemistry laboratory: student-produced experiments, peer and audio feedback, and integration of employability skills
Stability of cupuaçu (Theobroma grandiflorum) nectar during storage
Evaluation of cookies produced from blends of wheat, cassava and cowpea flours
Fermentation and antimicrobial characteristics of Lactobacillus plantarum and Candida tropicalis from Nigerian fermented maize (akamu)
PhD competences of food studies
Food Technology Department, Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia, Spain
CBQF - Centro de Biotecnologia e Qu´ımica Fina, Escola Superior de Biotecnologia, Centro Regional do Porto da, Universidade Catolica Portuguesa, Portugal
Instituto Polit´ecnico de Coimbra, Escola Superior Agr´aria, Coimbra, Portugal
Published: 18.10.2014.
Volume 3, Issue 2 (2014)
pp. 136-144;
Abstract
In European Higher Education, learning outcomes and competences have been used sometimes with different meanings and sometimes with the same meaning. But both terms have been more commonly used to refer to knowledge, understanding and abilities a student must demonstrate at the end of a learning experience. Their use is a consequence of the paradigm shift of the Bologna Process to a learner centered education environment. The definition of standards of competences (or learning outcomes) for the PhD degree is thus a need for the quality assurance of this degree. In this work, subject-specific and generic competences for the PhD in Food Science and Technology and their alignment with the European Qualifications Framework (EQF) level descriptors for quality assurance purposes have been identified.
Keywords
References
Citation
Copyright
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Article metrics
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
