Word Handbook NQF
Word Handbook NQF
Word Handbook NQF
IMPLEMENTATION
A HANDBOOK FOR
NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
FRAMEWORKS DEVELOPERS
(with special reference to India)
Freely based on the Capacity Building Training Programme held in Delhi from February
to May 2015, delivered by John Hart, Belinda Smith, Paul Farelly, Isabel Sutcliffe, Karen
Adams, Alexander Siboni, Vishishta Sam, Shawn Runacres, Jean Marc Castejon and invited
Speakers, for key Indian stakeholders in the area of skills development
“This Handbook has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of
this Handbook are the sole responsibility of Mott MacDonald and can in no way be taken to reflect
the views of the European Union.”
Acknowledgment
The capacity building programme, and therefore this Handbook, would not have been
possible without an active support from Anupama Tripathi and her Colleagues from the
National Skills Development Agency and from Pankaj Johri, Akanksha Saluja and Laveesh
Sharma from the India-EU Skills Development Project.
iii
Preface
vii
MODULE 6: UNDERSTANDING QUALITY ASSURANCE 59
1. Approach 60
2. What is Quality Assurance? 60
3. The Quality Cycle and the Components of the Quality Assurance Framework 63
4. Key Requirements of TVET QA Systems 64
5. Quality Assurance in the Indian Context 66
6. Skype Session: The Success Story of the Dual System (Helena Sebag) 67
MODULE 12: PILOT PROJECT IN RECOGNITION OF PRIOR LEARNING FOR DOMESTIC WORKERS 123
1. Summary & Observations on the Recognition of Prior Learning – Pilot for Domestic Workers 124
2. Key Challenges 126
ACRONYMS 131
Figure 3: Qualification types reflect the level of responsibility in the Labour Market (LM) 14
Figure 26: Recognition model for RPL within the NSQF concept 110
ix
List of Boxes
Box 1: The Case of India 6
List of Tables
Many countries which have developed a national The purpose of the training programme and
quali- fications framework would agree that the Handbook is not to replace old notions with new ones. A
framework is not easy or straightforward to implement fully trans- formative approach of qualifications starting
and that the framework should not be set in stone. from a blank sheet rather than from the existing
Implementation has proved to be a lengthy, even provision, history and culture in a country has always
continual, process. It should be an outcome of the failed. Expertise in the field of qualifications is
implementation of the national qualifications everywhere among practitioners in any country. But
framework that the framework becomes part of the clarify in common notions currently used, and
country’s language. Perhaps in- evitably the populate the TVET area with a common lan- guage is
community of purpose that need to exist to create a what it is about, starting with the notion of quali- fication.
national qualifications framework will largely in- volve It is a language which needs to be built, shared and
national and regional agencies and stakeholders understood. All countries which have experienced the
organisations. But a much wider community of development of NQF have experienced essentially
purpose is required if the national qualifications new forms of cooperation and coordination. More easily
framework is to make the move from a pretty diagram said than done.
and elegant policy papers to becoming part of the
language of learning for learners, teachers and The training programme was conceived as a three–
employers. For national qualifi- cations framework to pronged approach of the NQF:
become part of the language of learning, rather than ■ five days cycle on qualifications,
another passing fad, the benefits experienced by ■ five days cycle on quality assurance, and
learners, employers and learning provid- ers need to be
researched and communicated widely. This is one of ■ two days cycle on RPL.
the purposes of this handbook. The first cycle shows the multiple dimensions of quali-
fication frameworks, spanning a continuum from clas-
This Handbook is one of the outcomes of a capacity-
sifications of qualifications to instruments of policy plan-
building programme which was delivered between
ning and of international comparability. NQF are basically
18th February and 15th May, 2015 at the NSDA
standards-based system offering greater flexibility and
premises in Delhi, as part of the India-EU Skills
choice to learners, greater openness about the stan-
Development project, to a group of key Indian
dards that a learner has to achieve to receive credit to
Stakeholders actively involved in the current
their knowledge and skills and greater clarity of path-
implementation of the NSQF in India. In- deed, rarely
ways.
has a country committed so much time and energy to
the unfolding of a TVET reform around a na- tional The second cycle develops the notion of standards in
qualification framework. The training programme was action as trust-building mechanisms (related to trainers,
meant as a global introduction to the topic of de- training providers, assessors and assessment bodies,
velopment of qualification frameworks through a com- certifications) which give value to the qualifications.
mon understanding of the issues at stake, so that the
Participants, as practitioners and as stakeholders, could
gain new insights and use them on their own practice.
The third cycle describes Recognition of Prior While the Handbook is meant as support to the future
Learning as a lever to release the potential of NQF for sessions of the programme which will be carried out
recognizing achievements beyond that which arise in by the Central Staff Training and Research Institute
formal, aca- demic classrooms situations and to be (CS- TARI) attached to the Ministry of Skills
seen as steps to a bigger lifelong journey, rather than Development and Entrepreneurship, and the National
being ends in them- selves. Institute of Open Schooling attached to the Ministry of
The three cycles are obviously closely interrelated: Human Resources Development, it strives to be a self-
the understanding of the organic linkages between standing document whose purpose is didactical and
them is the main learning outcome of the programme, hopefully inspirational.
along with a critical perception of the advantages and The Handbook structure is as follows (in brackets the
disadvantag- es of NQFs, an assessment of the role of facilitators, followed by the Skype speakers).
NQF in TVET reforms and a sense of NQF as a
roadmap showing how qualifications relate to each NQF cycle:
other. ■ Understanding national qualifications frameworks
(Jean Marc Castejon, Arjen Deij and Michael Gra-
The Handbook is aiming at all qualification stakehold-
ham)
ers, seeking to make the NQF part of the language of
learning. Learners have to see the NQF as supporting ■ Components of the national qualifications frame-
their ambitions of progressing in employment and further works (John Hart, Jens Bjornavold)
learning. Individual employers need to see the benefit of ■ The governance of national qualifications frame-
improved retention, productivity and customer service works (John Hart, Brigitte Bouquet)
when they use the NQF in their recruitment and selection
■ Regional frameworks (John Hart, Aileen Ponton)
practice and in their employees training. Trainers
need to see the flexibility of NQF in improving their ■ Credit systems (John Hart, James Keevy)
capacity to make judgments about entry to courses
Quality assurance cycle:
and progress through courses, including giving proper
recognition to learners’ prior knowledge and skills. ■ Understanding quality assurance (Belinda Smith,
And government officials need to see the benefit of Helena Sebag)
the national qualifica- tions framework as the ■ Quality assurance of training providers and accred-
cornerstone of an education and training system that ited courses (Belinda Smith, Stephen Auburn)
will lead to vibrant national and lo- cal economies,
■ Quality assurance of assessment and certifications
strong and sustainable communities and skilled,
(Belinda Smith, Isabel Sutcliffe, Julie Swan)
educated and fulfilled people.
■ Quality assurance of qualifications (Jean marc
This Handbook is as much as possible based on the Castejon, Mike Coles)
presentations made by the experts during the
■ Quality assurance for Trainers (Alexander Siboni)
sessions, but it does not restore the richness of
exchanges and debates which have taken place Recognition of prior learning cycle:
during the sessions, both in the “live” morning
■ Understanding RPL (Paul Farrelly, Vishishta Sam,
sessions and in the afternoon Skype sessions in
Karen Adams)
which experts from another part of the world brought
an additional light to the topic of the day. The project ■ Tools and Practice of RPL (Paul Farrelly, Shawn
team wishes to express again its warm thanks to the Runacres)
Skype speakers and their organisations who, in the
afternoons of almost all sessions, have gra- ciously
given their time and expertise to the programme,
contributing to make it a global event. The friendly in-
ternational organisations are ETF, the CEDEFOP,
SCQF, Ofqual, CNCP and DEQA-VET.
FROM CONCEPTS TO IMPLEMENTATION
2 A HANDBOOK FOR NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORKS DEVELOPERS
MODULE 1
UNDERSTANDING
Q U A L I F I C AT I O
N S FRAMEWORKS
* The European Training Foundation is an agency of the European union that helps transition and developing countries
to harness the potential of their human capital through the reform of education, training and labour market systems
in the context of the EU’s external relations policy.
It is easy to forget that the current standard-based model
ample, in principle, qualifications as part of an NQF
of qualifications is a relatively recent invention. Full credit
are designed:
to New Zealand for setting up the first national qualifi-
cation authority and developing the first fully functioning ■ to be achieved by accumulation over time;
national qualification frameworks in 1990/1. The ■ to be transportable – units of one qualification can
emer- gence of broadly similar national qualification be used for other qualifications;
develop- ments in many different countries during the
■ to be transparent – learners know precisely what
1990s re- flected the extent to which experience was
learning outcomes they are required to demonstrate
being shared through exchange of information and
to achieve a qualification.
expertise in publi- cations. Since then many more
countries developed or are developing national Qualifications Frameworks are flourishing all over the
qualification frameworks- and many have established world. Many authors are wondering why so many policy
national qualifications authorities for their frameworks. makers are finding them such a good idea
International collaboration contin- ues to these days everywhere. The first frameworks (1984) came as an
and has been formalised, in a number of regions, in the idea that things could not continue as before, and
more recent development of transna- tional therefore had a trans- formational edge, like in New
qualification frameworks reflecting the growing Zealand, Australia, South Africa and England. This is
importance of learners and labour mobility but also, per- understandable since the competence-based approach
haps, as a means by which to encourage cross- of training was also grow- ing fast at the time and the
border policy convergence. productive sector could right- fully claim they had to
share the driving seat of TVET sys- tems. International
experts criss-crossing the world with this new talisman in
1 What are National hand might be partly responsible for this wave of
Qualifications optimism.
■ Qualifications are classified (in the case of vocational The majority of countries developing national
qualifications) in terms of comprehensive set of qualifica- tion frameworks today are also involved in
oc- cupational fields. ‘regional’ (that is a cluster of neighbouring countries) or
■ Qualifications are described in terms of learning out- transnational frameworks. However, as most countries
comes that are independent of the site, the form are at an early stage of conceptualisation and design,
of provision and the type of pedagogy and their relation to a regional framework vary
curriculum through which they may be achieved. considerably.
■ A national framework of qualifications provides a set NQFs can take many forms across the many
of benchmarks against which any learning can be countries where they are developing. What they have in
assessed in terms of its potential contribution to a common is that they are an instrument for the
qualification. classification of quali- fications according to a set of
■ All qualifications are defined in terms of elements criteria for specific levels of learning achieved.
(sometimes referred to as units expressed as quan- Qualifications frameworks aim to bring coherence and
tifiable credit. A learner has to achieve a given num- clarity to qualifications systems. When qualifications
ber of credit to gain a qualification. are placed in a classification sys- tem, they can be
more easily compared by individuals, employers and
It is these features that, in principle, allow institutions. But NQFs go beyond other classification
qualifications to be the basis of the goals they claim systems by bringing together qualifications issued by
for them. For ex- different bodies and on the basis of levels of learning
outcomes.
FROM CONCEPTS TO IMPLEMENTATION
4 A HANDBOOK FOR NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORKS DEVELOPERS
When different countries’ NQF are linked to each learning routes –formal or informal- which recognise and
other, directly or via a common reference, qualification encourage lifelong learning.
from dif- ferent countries can be compared, which
supports in- dividuals’ mobility across borders. But the But outcomes do not stop with the frameworks of
purpose of establishing an NQF – and the quali- fications –they are also being applied to curricula,
implications of doing so teach- ing and learning, assessment and standards.
– are much wider than classification and comparison. Countries adopting NQFs are seeking to move to
outcomes-based curricula in their schools and colleges.
Contrarily to qualification systems, national qualifications Outcomes can be used to identify appropriate
frameworks are social constructs. This means that the assessment criteria. Most of the times, learning
framework is the result of a consensus between con- outcomes are based on occupational standards which
cerned stakeholders. In Europe, the word qualification specify the required work-related com- petences for
has been agreed to mean a formal outcome of an as- an occupation.
sessment and validation process which is obtained
when a competent body determines that an individual While NQFs are tentatively outcomes-based or out-
has achieved learning outcomes to given standards. comes-oriented, we should not picture the move to
This definition has been adopted in India through the No- out- come as a radical switch but rather as a gradual
tification of the National Skills Qualification Framework tilting of the balance. Indeed, we see countries take a
(23rd December, 2013). more pragmatic approach, taking account of inputs
such as institutional provision and structure and
NQF are part of wider qualification systems. Qualification duration of a programme.
systems include all aspects of a country’s activity related
to the recognition of learning and other mechanisms that
link education and training to the labour market and civil 2 Main Purposes for
society. This includes the development and implementa-
tion of institutional arrangements and processes relat-
Recent Qualification
ing to quality assurance, assessment and the award Reforms
of qualifications.
It is not always clear whether the development of a NQF
The levels of a framework indicate different degrees is evidence-based or the result of an intuitive
of complexity of the learning outcomes. The lowest approach from the belief that quick results are
level often define the basic generic or vocational skills possible. Although, NQFs are usually seen as tools for
for people who can work effectively under reforms, they are not neutral tools. It seems likely that
supervision, the central levels typically define the one reason why govern- ments have become so
expected requirements for professionals who can act enthusiastic about qualifications in recent decades is
independently, whilst the highest levels emphasize the that not only are they assumed to motivate learners
capacity to analyse and in- novate, create new and potential learners, but they can serve other roles
knowledge and may include the abil- ity to lead and that are just as important, but frequent- ly less explicit
manage people and processes. In some QFs the aspects of governments’ policy. Among the most
highest levels are reserved for holders of higher frequent objectives are
education degrees, but this is increasingly challenged by ■ To establish national standards for the outcomes of
lifelong learning frameworks with a strong labour market learning and improve the social and/or economic
dimension, so that increasingly the highest levels are be- value of qualifications
ing opened up to vocational qualifications too.
■ To improve the quality of qualifications and assess-
In order to understand a qualification as the outcome ment, increase trust in qualifications and gain nation-
of an assessment, it is useful to understand learning al / international recognition for workers’ skills
out- comes. Learning outcomes say what a learner is ■ To relate qualifications to each other and improve
expect- ed to know, understand and be able to do at access, progression routes and the possibilities of
the end of a course of learning. Outcomes tell us what transferring learning (sometimes summarised as “im-
is inside a qualification –so creating readability. At the proving learners’ journeys”)
same time, by defining a qualification by what the
■ To provide a basis for co-operation between stake-
learner needs to achieve rather than by the traditional
holders in education and training in pursuit of
inputs such as du- ration of programme, learning
some aspect(s) of national policy on social or
outcomes facilitate diverse
economic development
5
■ Make education more responsive to demand (incl.
Box 1: The Case of India
from labour market)
■ Enhance quality of learning Objectives of the NSQF
■ Recognise existing skills (incl. in-/non-formal learn- • Accommodate the diversity of the Indian education
ing) and training systems
■ Promote international mobility of workers and • Allow the development of a let of qualifications for
learners each level, based on outcomes which are accepted
■ Reference qualifications to trans-national framework across the nation
■ Promote parity of esteem for vocational learning • Provide structure for development and maintenance
of progression pathways which provide access to
■ Make education system more transparent
qualifications and assist people to move easily and
■ Provide instrument of accountability and control readily between different education and training
■ Promote access, transfer and progression sectors and between those sectors and the labour
market.
■ Increase coherence/coordination of education sys-
tem • Give individuals an option to progress through educa-
tion and training and gain recognition for their prior
Such purposes are over ambitious if they do not come
learning and experiences.
with a range of actions, including appropriate laws
and policies, institutions, budget allocation, • Underpins national regulatory and quality assurance
infrastructure development, personal development for arrangements for education and training;
teachers and trainers and provision of learning • Support and enhances the national and international
resources materials. The goals above cannot be mobility of persons with NSQF-compliant qualifica-
achieved by the NQF alone. Policy breadth is required, tions through increased recognition of the value and
which is defined as the extent to which the comparability of Indian qualifications.
establishment of the framework is directly and
(NSQF Notification, December 23rd, 2013)
explicitly linked with other measures to influence how
the framework is used, such as the availability of
assessment systems, the adequate retraining of trainers,
the existence of well developed sectoral organisations
tices applied in other countries, and the need to take full
and the new partnership without which, a NQF can nev-
account of national history and a culture. This tension
er be more than a ‘map’. Among less explicit aspects
has produced different results in countries depending
of government policy, a greater emphasis on
on how predominantly context-bound or
qualifications enables central government to:
predominantly context-free the frameworks set out to
■ Increase their control of education in areas where be. David Raffe refers to this difference the NQF
it is relatively weak. having an institutional logic in the first case and an
■ Provide simple measurable criteria for allocating intrinsic logic in the second.
funds to institutions.
Hence the NQF differ according to their
■ Make local and regional education and training or-
Scope: sector or comprehensive
ganisations more accountable.
Aims: communication, reform or transformation
■ Provide quantitative measures of the success of
public policies. Governance: regulatory or voluntary
Design: tight or loose
■ Try to reform the system according to the one-fit-all Governance | In the case of comprehensive frame-
principles of the framework (in line with outcome- works, four set of functions must be carried out as
driven model), or part of the governance.
■ Introduce a “looser’ framework accepting and re- ■ Management of the framework
specting existing diversity but insisting on a common ■ Standards and qualification development
core of principles to be introduced and shared.
■ Quality assurance of education and training providers
Tight frameworks are normally regulatory ■ Assessment and certification.
frameworks and define uniform specifications for
qualifications to be applied across sectors. They seek Clear consistent roles of different ministries and public
to improve the rel- evance and quality of qualifications authorities need to be distinguished from the role of
and the coherence of the qualifications system. They the “Qualification Authority” and from other players
are typically found in ei- ther the newer Member States such as the private sector and NGOs. NQFs are
of the EU, for example, or in transition and developing voluntary or reg- ulatory according to the obligation
countries. Tight frameworks, as exemplified by the early made to the training providers to comply to national
South African and New Zea- land frameworks, generated standards of delivery as a condition of access to public
resistance and undermined support for the initiatives. funding. There are no clear cut difference between the
These experiences have led to general reassessment of two. The table 1 summarizes some countries’
the role of frameworks, pointing to the need to protect arrangements in terms of scope and governance.
diversity.
Aims of frameworks – Communication frameworks
Loose frameworks introduce a set of comprehensive | aim to coordinate different subsectors of a national
level descriptors to be applied across sub-systems, education and training system, and make the national
but allow substantial variation across sub-frameworks. qualifications system more transparent. They are pre-
dominant when the national system is long settled and
Whether a framework is tight or loose depends on the sustained by a national consensus. The changes to
stringency of conditions a qualification must meet to the national system tend to be adjustments rather
be included in the framework. A possible example is the than ma- jor overhaul. These frameworks essentially
dif- ference between the English and Scottish add value to the system.
frameworks. The SCQF makes simple demands on
qualifications to be admitted to its hierarchy, the Reforming frameworks are more ambitious: they seek
requirement for a mini- mum size, quality assurance to actively improve the national education and training
and a learning outcomes format are seen as minimum system in terms of relevance, coherence and quality
requirements to support the integrity of the SCQF. This of qualifications. They are typically found either in the
might be contrasted with the English QCF which makes newer member States of the EU or in transition and
demands in terms of structure, for example, develop- ing countries. They are therefore much more
qualification titles, size, unit for- mat, form of influenced by external factors and tend to resemble
assessment criteria, classification of units as each others in structure (e.g. numbers of levels) and
mandatory or optional, and rules of combination of scope. Tight re- forming frameworks, as exemplified
units to form a qualification. The effect of the framework by the early south African and New Zealand
on qualifications therefore differs markedly. frameworks, generated resis-
Table 1: Countries arrangements in scope and governance (Source ETF)
Country Scope Governance
Australia All sectors Ministry
Denmark All sectors Co-ordinating Committee (4 ministries)
England and Northern Vocational Government sponsored agency
Ireland (separate HE framework)
France VET Government sponsored agency
Germany All sectors National and regional ministries
Ireland All sectors Government sponsored agency + separate schools authority.
Kosovo All sectors National qualification authority + separate school VET and HE
authorities
Malaysia VET and HE National qualification authority
Morocco All sectors Possibly a commission of representative of most important ministries
and social partners
New Zealand All sectors National qualification authorities + separate HE authority.
Scotland All sectors Independent Partnership Organisation (Ministry, National qualification
authority, VET and HE bodies)
South Africa All sectors National qualification authority + schools & colleges, VET and HE
authorities
UAE All sectors National qualification authority + VET and HE authorities
Wales All sectors Ministry
4 Convergence and The countries that have tried to make a radical break
National with their previous qualifications systems have had the
9
Scotland demonstrates very well the importance of
par- tial frameworks as building blocks for an NQF. Only Conclusion
when a range of partial frameworks – Higher Still,
SCOTCAT, Higher National Diplomas and NVQs was In many countries, the NQF has still to become visible
in place, was the comprehensive Scottish Credit and to ordinary citizens and be part of the language of learn-
Qualifications Framework introduced. It was the ing. Experience shows that a NQF does not have to
existence of the .build- ing blocks that established both be perfect before entering a real world. It is preferable
the confidence in, and the practicality of, a broader to be pragmatic, to test out, to build support of a wide
more comprehensive quali- fications framework (the va- riety of potential users – rather than to try to
SCQF). Here the term building block refers to specific launch a framework which is perfect in every detail.
levels (upper secondary or higher education) and sectors Seeking per- fection before going public is
(vocational or academic or an in- dustrial sector like understandable but the time it takes to achieve this
engineering). It does not refer to the elements of a may well build frustration amongst users rather than
framework such as modules, units, stan- dards, levels, demand. Demand is built by having learners, teachers
and credits, although these may well form elements of and employers as advocates of the national
partial frameworks. qualification framework because they have
experienced its benefits. Such advocates will be far more
The combination of the various features of NQFs can effective in pushing forward implementation than a
be summarised in Figure 1. Quality assurance tends roomful of beautifully written policy papers.
to take the central role and the way it is implemented
deter- mines the features of the framework.
Comprehensive framework
levels
design of qualifications
defining/writing learning outcomes
design of progmrammes
assessment
Classification tool QUALITY ASSURANCE validation
based on levels
credits
accreditation (providers...)
learning pathways
Recognition
Unit-Based and
Qualifications Based
Frameworks
NQFs vary in terms of how qualifications are registered
in the framework. The starting assumption, shared by
most initial proposals for NQFs, is that qualifications
should be unit-based; in other words the learning
outcomes assumed to be necessary for a particular
qualification are divided up into their basic elements
or units. This process of unitisation draws on a familiar
of methodology and derives from the functional qualifications (like in France) with only limited
analy- sis that was common to much opportunities for learners to choose individual units.
occupational psychology in the United States
However, despite the trend to whole qualifications-based
(Callaghan, 1961). Step 1 involves breaking
down the skill and knowledge demands asso- frameworks, the idea of unitisation remains extremely at-
tractive to policy-makers.
ciated with a qualification into its smallest parts
(units). Each unit is then assigned to a level and
given a credit rating in terms of the notional The Lifelong learning paradigm has also encouraged
hours needed to acquire the necessary skills a restructuring of qualifications, building on the new
and knowledge. Step 2 involves specifying the thinking about learning outcomes which has been in-
minimum constraints 5 on the ways in which the fluencing partner countries for six or seven years. More
units can be combined together, as well as the countries now look to build their qualifications on
number of units needed to gain a qualification. units. Of course, when qualifications were
Step 3 then assumes that the user (employer indistinguishable from curricula, there were no unit-
and/or employee/ trainee) chooses his or her set of based qualifications. Unitized qualifications can be
units and accumulates enough credit to gain a offered to learners either in combinations or singly. We
qualification. should not think of ‘par- tial’ qualifications, which
implies something less than a full qualification. Instead,
This approach to qualification design maximizes it is important to appreciate how units offer flexible
flex- ibility and choice for learners and options to learners. For example, comprehensive,
employers to put to- gether units in ways that unitized qualifications can be delivered via a regular, full
suit their interests. In practice the unitisation programme in initial VET, while adult learners and those
model has created as many problems as it solves. in retraining may prefer more readily manageable unit-
Employers and employees (or students) invariably by-unit learning, allowing for flexible and accessible
have different interests and the latter frequently assessment. In this way, units support
lack the knowledge to make reliable choices. As a a more adaptable workforce, and crucially are by their
result the NQFs in both New Zealand and South nature sympathetic to LLL. Countries usually specify
Africa have moved away from registering units and criteria for qualifications design, including units, in their
the NQF is increasingly based on whole NQF requirements or guidance.
Labour Market
Anticipation of skill
needs
Anticipation of skill
needs
Qualification
types
OS = Occupational standards
CBQ CBQ = Competence-Based
Qualifications
Anticipation of skill
needs
Qualification
types
Secondary CBQ
VET
qualifications
OS = Occupational standards
Qualification CBQ = Competence-Based
Standard Qualifications
Anticipation of skill
needs
Qualification
types
2ndary VET CBQ
qualificatio
n
Qualification Final
Standard Assessment
Educational
Standard Core
Taught
Curriculum
Curriculum
School OS = Occupational standards
Curriculum CBQ = Competence-Based
Qualifications
FURTHER READINGS
• Bjørnåvold, J., Coles, M., Cedefop and European Commission. 2010. Note 2, European Qualifications Framework series. Lux-
embourg, EC Publications Office. http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/doc/eqf/note2_en.pdf (Accessed 26
November 2012.)
• Bohlinger, S. 2012. Qualifications frameworks and learning outcomes: challenges for Europe’s lifelong learning area. Journal of
Education and Work, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 279–97.
• Callaghan, R, Education and the Cult of Efficiency, 1961.
• Cedefop, 2009. The Shift to Learning Outcomes: Policies and Practices in Europe, Reference series 72. Luxembourg, EC Publica-
tions Office. www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/publications/12900.aspx (Accessed 16 April 2015.)
• Global inventory of Regional and National Qualifications frameworks, vol 1 Thematic Chapters,UNESCO, IUL, ETF, CEDEFOP, 2015.
• Young, M, National Qualifications : Their Feasibility for Effective Implementation in Developing Countries, Working paper N° 22,
ILO, Geneva, 2005.
5
MODULE 2
LEARNING
OUTCOMES
AND LEVEL
DESCRIPTORS
* The Cedefop is the European Union Agency that helps policy makers improve vocational training systems and
provides expertise on skills and qualifications.
1. Learning Outcomes They are used:
■ at a policy level (e.g. national curriculum policy)
While the EQF definition of a qualification framework
(QF) insists on the use of learning outcome as a way ■ at a systems level (e.g. in qualification frameworks)
to clas- sify qualifications, ■ at the level of qualifications (e.g. qualification
stan- dards)
“… a mechanism for classifying the qualifications
which are awarded within a qualification system … ■ at the level of specific curricula and learning pro-
according to a set of criteria for specified levels of grammes
learning achieved.”
Example of policy-level outcomes
other definitions focus on the QF as a lever for quality
The Kosovo Curriculum Framework specifies six com-
“All qualifications frameworks, establish a basis for petences to be mastered during compulsory education:
im- proving the quality, accessibility, linkages and ■ Communication and expression competence
public or labour market recognition of qualifications
■ Thinking competence
within a coun- try and internationally.”
■ Learning competence
or even as a lever for more radical transformation
■ Life, work and environment-related competence
“Modern NQFs can be described as ‘instruments with ■ Personal competence
a vision’ questioning current education and training
■ Civic competence
prac- tices and challenging existing professional and
sectoral interests.” Example of sector-level outcomes
Box 2: Origins of the outcome approach The Scottish Qualifications Authority’s Administration
and IT qualifications provide practical opportunities to
Educational influences apply and develop organisational, administrative and IT
1950s Skinner – programmed instructional materials skills. Learners develop IT skills and use technologies as
– Bloom – domains of learning (Cognitive, tools to achieve organisational and administrative tasks.
Psychomotor, Affective)
1960s Mager – learning objectives
Example of qualification/curriculum-level
– Glaser – criterion-referenced assessment
1970s Bloom – mastery learning outcomes (SCQF)
1980s Gardner, Sternberg, etc – theories of differentiated Learning outcomes are similar to learning objectives.
intelligence
Learners will be able to:
HR/Training influences ■ work co-operatively and collaboratively and assume
1950s Hay – job evaluation factors (know-how, problem-
shared responsibility
solving and accountability)
1960s McLelland (McBer) – competence based on the ■ operate within an administrative context
performance of successful individuals
1970s Spencer – soft skill competences ■ prioritise tasks and work within deadlines
1980s Mansfield & Mathews (UK) – the job competence ■ acquire, extend and apply administration – and IT-
model (skills, management skills & context-
related skills) related skills, knowledge and understanding
– Dreyfus & Dreyfus – model of skill acquisition ■ create and present business documents to an ap-
(novice, competence, proficiency, expertise, and
propriate and professional standard
mastery)
■ be involved in self- and peer assessment
Learning outcomes [Cedefop 2009: p. 141] are de- Example of unit-level outcomes in the UK model.
fined as statements of what a learner knows, under- ■ Use a spreadsheet application to interpret a given
stands and is able to do after completion of learning. brief
[cf Official NSQF Notification]. The learning may take
■ Use advanced functions of a relational database
place formally or informally (through experience gained
to interpret a given brief
in the community or workplace).
9
fragmentation – lack of understanding of how outcomes to do or understand. A pragmatic use of learning out-
reinforce each other. comes –combining it with careful consideration of
input element- has been important for redefining the
Box 3: Learning outcomes and competences
relation- ship between vocational and academic
qualifications.
These terms are used in a number of different ways by
different countries and authorities. Level descriptors are statements of generic out-
A learning outcome is a standardised statement of the comes which characterise the level. Level descrip-
knowledge and/or skills which has been/will be achieved tors are intrinsically about the depth and complexity of
by an individual who completes an education/training knowledge, the range and sophistication of
programme/qualification. application/ practice, the degrees of integration,
A competence is a specialised kind of learning outcome. independence and creativity and the degrees of
It is a standardised statement of the knowledge, skills and supervision/independence and responsibility for others’
behaviours required to operate successfully in a specific work. The level descriptors are not about the size of the
work role.
qualification, the age of the learner, stages of
The term “competency” seems to be used (i) as an alterna- education, where learning took place or
tive to “learning outcome”, (ii) as an alternative to “compe- wages/salaries.
tence”, and (iii) to describe a component of a competence.
All qualifications frameworks use level descriptors to peg
qualifications on a hierarchical set of levels that
2 Identifying Levels number between 4 and 12, but mostly between 8 and
10.
and Domains of
Learning Levels relate to factors such as:
■ complexity and depth of knowledge and under-
Each level in a framework is defined by a set of descrip-
standing
tors (domains) indicating the learning outcomes relevant
to qualifications at that level. Levels are usually ■ range and sophistication of practical and intellectual
defined by reference to structure of the labour market skills
(e.g. from unskilled worker – helper- operative- skilled ■ degree of integration, independence and creativity
worker – su- pervisor- trainer- specialist- manager required
levels), by refer- ence to the structure of Education
■ degree of complication and predictability of the context
and Training system (secondary-post secondary-higher
education levels) , or both. In the latter case, national ■ role(s) taken in relation to colleagues/fellow workers
arrangements state the correspondence between of
learning achievements and occupations. Level Typical outcomes of learning at the level – i.e.
descriptors for national qualifications frameworks have someone with a qualification at this level should
been derived from existing curricular requirements, be able to … capable of …
training regulations and other inputs. They are really a But
combination of input and output-based ap- proach.
a. a qualification need not match all aspects of the
The learning outcomes approach adds an im- portant
level descriptors
element to the “old picture”, making it possible to have
a fresh look at the ordering and valuing of qualifi- b. some aspects of the qualification may be at
cations–not on the basis of the type of institution but higher or lower levels
on the basis of what a learner is expected to know, be
able
NQF
LEVELS
Education and Work
training entry levels roles and
and exit profiles
qualifications
FROM CONCEPTS TO IMPLEMENTATION
20 A HANDBOOK FOR NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORKS DEVELOPERS
Level descriptors have to apply to all the types of Strategically, level descriptors can support:
qualification in the framework: highly academic,
■ the creation of linkages between higher education
general, pre-vocational, workplace, etc
and VET
Operationally, level descriptors can be used: ■ strengthening links between IVET/CVET and the la-
■ in designing qualifications bour market
■ to allocate learning programmes and qualifications ■ making the system more accessible
to levels in the QF ■ establishing systems to validate non-formal prior
■ in validating qualifications and programmes learning
■ in communicating with learners and other users ■ establishing systems to give credit, exemptions, etc.
about qualifications ■ actions to improve curricula (teaching and learning)
■ to map progression routes within and across the ■ the recruitment and workforce development by
education and training sectors em- ployers
■ to set entry requirements/recommendations for ■ a shared and systematic approach to the quality
pro- grammes of qualifications and certificates
EQF
Factual and theoretical knowledge
Cognitive and practical skills
- logical, intuitive and creative thinking
- manual dexterity and the use of methods, materials, tools and instruments
Responsibility and autonomy (‘competence’)
Some countries add ‘attitudes’, usually relating to work roles.
IRELAND
Knowledge
breadth of knowledge/kind of knowledge know-how & skill range/know-how & skill selectivity
Competence
Context/role/learning to learn/insight
SCOTLAND
Knowledge and understanding
Practice: applied knowledge, skills and understanding
Generic cognitive skills
Communication, ICT and Numeracy skills
Autonomy, accountability and working with others
GERMANY
Professional competence – knowledge
Professional competence – skills
Personal competence – social competence
Personal competence – self-competence
21
ASEAN FRAMEWORK
“Level descriptors based on the notion of competence” which includes:
• Cognitive competence (the use of theory and concepts)
• Functional competence (skills or know-how)
• Personal competence (knowing how to conduct oneself)
• Ethical competence (personal and professional values).
23
They will be expected to understand what constitutes
quality in the occupation and will distinguish between
NSQF LEVEL 7
good and bad quality in the context of their work. Summary
They will be expected to operate hygienically and in
ways which show an understanding of environmental Work at level 7 will take place in contexts which combine
issues. They will take account of health and safety the routine and the non-routine and are subject to varia-
issues as they affect the work they carry out or tions. Job holders will carry out a broad range of work
supervise. which require wide-ranging specialised theoretical and
practical skills.
In working with others, they will be expected to
conduct themselves in ways which show an Job holders will be responsible for the output and
understanding of the social and political environment. devel- opment of a work group within and
organisation. People carrying out these job roles are
likely to be graduates. They may be described as
NSQF LEVEL 6
‘managers’ or ‘senior technicians’.
Summary
Individuals employed to carry out these job roles will
Work at level 6 will require the use of both standard be expected to be able to communicate clearly in
and non-standard practices. Job holders will carry out speech and writing and are likely to be required to
a broad range of work which will require a wide range carry out mathematical calculations as part of their
of specialised technical skills backed by clear factual work. They should also be skilful in collecting and
and theoretical knowledge. organising infor- mation to communicate logically
about the work.
Job holders will be responsible for the completion of
their own work and expected to learn and improve They will be expected to have wide-ranging factual
their performance on the job. They are likely to have and theoretical knowledge of practice within the
full re- sponsibility for others’ work and learning. occupation, and a wide range of specialised practical
People carry- ing out these jobs may be described as and cognitive skills. They will be able to generate
‘master techni- cians’ and ‘trainers’. solutions to problems which arise in their work.
Individuals employed to carry out these job roles will They will be expected to understand what constitutes
be expected to be able to communicate clearly in quality in the occupation and distinguish between
speech and writing and may be required to carry out good and bad quality in all aspects of their work. They
mathemati- cal calculations. They should also be able to will be expected to work in ways which show a good
collect data, organise information, and communicate under- standing of environmental issues. They will take
logically about the work. They will solve problems by account of health and safety issues as they affect the
selecting and ap- plying methods, tools, materials and work they carry out and manage.
information.
In working with others, they will be expected to
They will be expected to have broad factual and theoreti- conduct themselves in ways which show a good
cal knowledge applying to practice within the occupa- understanding of the social and political environment.
tion, and a range of practical and cognitive skills.
They will be able to generate solutions to problems NSQF LEVEL 8
which arise in their practice.
Summary
They will be expected to understand what constitutes
quality in the occupation and to distinguish between Job holders who are qualified at level 8 will normally
good and bad quality in the context of all aspects of their be responsible for managing the work of a team and
work. They will be expected to work in ways which show devel- oping the team. The work will involve dealing with
an understanding of environmental issues. They will take unpre- dictable circumstances affecting the work.
account of health and safety issues as they affect the
Their work will require the use of comprehensive
work they carry out or manage.
knowl- edge and understanding of the occupational
In working with others, they will be expected to field and a commitment to self-development.
conduct themselves in ways which show an
They will normally need an ability to develop creative
understanding of the social and political environment.
solutions to problems requiring abstract thought. They
will be required to show intellectual independence and
FROM CONCEPTS TO IMPLEMENTATION
24 A HANDBOOK FOR NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORKS DEVELOPERS
a rigorous analytical ability. They will need to be good having completed a learning process.
communicators.
Cedefop’s 2009 publication on learning outcomes
NSQF LEVEL 9 showed a geographical difference and an institutional
difference in the actual use of learning outcomes. Our
Summary (ongoing) study 2013-2015 demonstrates that the
shift to learning outcomes is now gathering speed in
Job holders who are qualified at level 9 will normally
nation- al qualifications frameworks, for curricula and
be responsible for complex decision-making in
to orient teaching and training and for assessment.
unpredict- able contexts.
The learning outcomes principle is – explicitly since 2004
They will have to exercise senior responsibility in an
– systematically promoted in the EU policy agenda for
or- ganisation and show mastery of the issues in the
education, training and employment. It can be seen
occu- pation and the ability to innovate.
as the ‘glue’ binding together a wide range of
Their work will require the use of advanced initiatives taken during recent years, such as
knowledge and skill. They may make contributions to Europass, the EQF, ECTS, ECVET and ESCO… While
knowledge in their field through research. the specific term may not have been used, learning
outcomes are not new. What is new, however, is the
high priority given to learn- ing outcomes at European,
NSQF LEVEL 10 national and local level.
Summary
■ At policy level, learning outcomes serve the purpose
Job holders who are qualified at level 10 will normally be of transparency, of increased relevance and
responsible for strategic decision-making. The context quality of qualifications, of accountability and it is
of their work will be complex and unpredictable. seen as a way to open up to non-formal and
informal learn- ing. But there are concerns: are
They are likely to be responsible for an organisation or a learning outcomes a policy hype? Are they
significant division of an organisation. They will have monitored and reviewed? Are they not a way to
to provide leadership. impose objectives top down, reducing local and
institutional autonomy? Are they not mainly
Their work will require highly specialised knowledge and
unnecessary bureaucracy?
problem-solving skills. They may make original contribu-
tions to knowledge in their field through research, schol- ■ At the level of practitioners, LO sets clear targets for
arship or innovative practice. the learner which is a way to motivates to learning
and to encourages flexible learning pathways:
The strongest evidence for allocating a qualification to a
they are a guiding tool for teachers and for
level of the NSQF will be direct evidence of a match
assessors. But there are concerns: Do we risk to
be- tween the outcomes of the qualification and the
reduce the scope and richness of learning? Do
descrip- tor for one NSQF level. Where a qualification is
we undermine the vision of open and active
made up of clearly distinguished parts or components
learning? Do we de- crease rather than increase
(such as modules, units or courses), the individual
transparency.
parts of the qualification can be at different levels. This
means that it will be necessary to use indirect evidence A Cedefop study 2014 – addressed the writing and prac-
and weighting. tical application of learning outcomes. It was an analysis
of learning outcomes based VET standards and
25
of learning. There is no common format for describing Can learning outcomes facilitate recognition/validation of
learning outcomes, which reduces comparability. The prior learning?
level of detail (granularity) varies dramatically, reducing
transparency and comparability. A 2012 EU Recommendation stresses that validation
of non formal learning should build on the same
Learning outcomes must be fit for purpose: The pur- learning outcomes based standards as those used for
pose of the LO description will influence the level of traditional qualifications.
detail (granularity) of the description, moving from the
general to the more specific that is from full ■ How can LO descriptions be written to capture the
qualifications/pro- grammes to programme or diversity of non-formal and informal learning?
qualification units and to as- sessment criteria. All have How can we balance generality and specificity?
to use ACTION VERBS, iden- tify the relevant OBJECT
■ How can LO descriptions be written to capture the
and describe the CONTEXT of the learning process.
relevant learning domains? How can we balance re-
quirements to, for example, knowledge and skills?
Figure 7: Writing learning outcomes – the essential role
How can overview and a holistic approach be ex-
of action verbs
pressed?
Create, estimate, interpret,
■ How can performance requirements and criteria
justify, rearrange, reconstruct
be written in a way which appreciates non-stan-
dardised learning?
Apply, choose, distinguish,
explain, employ, Illustrate, Can learning outcomes facilitate validation/recognition of
Action verbs are practise, produce, use
used to prior learning?
express growing
complexity and help Memorize, recall, repeat. The experiences from writing assessment criteria are rel-
to distinguish reproduce, duplicate evant. What is key is the lack of ambiguity, the
between learning reflected choice of action verbs (Brief statements - one
domains
action verb) and the focus on observable learning and
explicit mani- festations of learning. There is a risk that
statements be- come too detailed and prescriptive and
not open to non- standardised learning and a risk that
‘observable’ learning be defined too narrowly – failing
to capture the richness and diversity of non-formal and
informal learning?
FURTHER READINGS
• CEDEFOP, 2009 The shift to learning outcomes - Policies and practices in Europe
• Méhaut, P. and Winch, C. 2012. The European qualifications framework: skills, competences or knowledge? European
Educational Research Journal, Vol. 11, No 3. http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2012 November 3.369 (Accessed 26 November
2012.)
• Raffe, D. 2009a. National qualifications frameworks in Ireland and Scotland: a comparative analysis. Presentation at
European Conference on Educational Research, Vienna, 28–30 September 2009. www.ces.ed.ac.uk/PDF%20 Files/NQF_
ECER_2009.pdf (Accessed 26 November 2012.)
• —. 2012b. What is the evidence for the impact of national qualifications frameworks? Comparative Education, Vol. 49, No.
2, pp. 143¬–62. www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03050068.2012.686260 (Accessed 26 November 2012.)
• Strathdee, R. 2011. The implementation and impact of the New Zealand national qualifications framework. Journal of
Education and Work, Vol. 24, No. 3–4, pp. 233–58.
• Tuck, R. 2007. An Introductory Guide to National Qualifications Frameworks: Conceptual and Practical Issues for Policy-
Makers. Geneva, ILO.
• Young, M. 2011. The educational implications of introducing an NQF for developing countries. Journal of Education and
Work, Vol. 24, No. 3–4, pp. 223–32.
FROM CONCEPTS TO IMPLEMENTATION
26 A HANDBOOK FOR NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORKS DEVELOPERS
MODULE 3
GOVERNANCE
OF NATIONAL
QUALIFICATIONS
FRAMEWORK
* National Committee For Professional Certification, Its mission is among others to list the offer of vocational certifications (national register
of vocational certifications), to inform people and companies about the certifications listed in the national register and the certifications
recognized in the member states of the European Union and to check the coherence, complementarity and renewal of diplomas and
qualification documents, together with their adaptation to evolution in qualifications and work organisation).
1. Implementation of - ensuring that the operational principles of the
3 SECTORAL COUNCILS
General & Further Edn & Trng Sectoral Consultative Processes
Higher Education
Trades & Occupations
SECTORAL BODIES
The Quality Assurance Agency (HE) SCQF FORUM
Universities Scotland (Stakeholders)
Colleges Scotland
The Scottish Qualif’ns Authority
29
Many stakeholders need to work together in the build- Soviet
ing of a framework. With global development and de-
mographic changes, lifelong learning systems are
emerging, opening up what had been virtually states
monopoly on qualifications. There are more
institutions, and a greater range of providers have
emerged such as professional bodies, municipalities,
private companies, employment services, non-
governmental organisations, private schools and
international providers, offering dif- ferent kinds of
qualifications. This makes it more impor- tant to
regulate that are offered by different bodies to dif- ferent
target groups, in order to reduce the proliferation of
qualifications, and to protect the interest of citizens
and employers by strengthening confidence in the value
of qualifications.
2. Changing
Institutional
Arrangements
To be successful, qualification-system reform require
that all stakeholders are mobilized and involved and take
ownership of the changes. It is unlikely that all
changes happen voluntarily and though mutual
agreement. Legis- lation is often needed to create new
conditions, stimulate new developments and regulate
roles and responsibili- ties, in particular in market-
oriented or state-led systems where governance of such
systems is not determined by such dialogue.
They are often linked with making a specific Legislation is important in many countries as the
body re- sponsible for the implementation. The official authorisation to begin implementation of the
first relevant piece of legislation in England was framework. However, what really counts is not these
the act to establish the Na- tional Council for single acts, but how the NQF is starting to filter through
Vocational Qualifications in 1986, al- though it in all relevant legislation. Without reference to the NQF
took until 2000 before the NQF became a real- ity. in other legisla- tion, its impact is limited. The NQF
The Education Act of 1989 in New Zealand decree in Ukraine only sets the general objectives and
the ten-level framework.
Functions Tasks
Further NQF Maintain NQF Structures
Development
Prepare Policy Decisions
Identify Qualifications on Offer that could Enter the Qualifications Framework Address Proliferation/
Overlaps of Qualifications
Invite Stakeholders to Develop Specific Standards /Qualifications
Communicate, Inform &
NQF Info Dissemination at Home and Abroad & Website
Advocate
Use of Common Language
Navigation Tools
International Positioning Align with Qualifications Framework of European Higher Education Area (EHEA) and European
Qualifications Framework (EQF)
Act as Contact Point (EQF, EHEA, EUROPASS, National Academic Recognition Information Centre
Guidance for Qualification Types, for Validation of Non-Formal and Informal Learning & for Training
Programmes
Bouquet) lows:
1) Vocational diplomas (degrees) and titles delivered Is it really fitted with the needs of the sector?
by public authorities “in behalf of the State”, under
Does it take into account the evolution of the certification
the responsibility of the ministry – including all the
Higher education degrees from Universities Have possible former recommendations by the CNCP
been taken into account?)
2) Vocational Qualification Certificates elaborated by
economic sectors under the responsibility of How is the certification quality-assured to keep the quali-
social partners: no level fication in line with the needs of the labour market?
3) Titles or certificates delivered by economic cham- The certification is then presented to the “conseil de per-
bers, public or private institutions in their own names fectionnement” (a commission of practionners and train-
(ministry as well for example: Defense Ministry, min- ers) for advice.
istry of the Interior) The certification standards which all certifications
must meet concern:
And two ways to allocate a certification to the
■ Standards of activities
Register
■ Description of tasks and competencies
■ the registration “by law”, where there is no proto- associated to the activities
cols, only law and official texts . It concerns Diplo-
■ Competences and tasks which will be evaluated
mas (or degrees) delivered by public authorities
“in behalf of the State” through different ministries ■ Standard and criteria of evaluation
in charge of Education, Agriculture, Social affairs, ■ What will be checked: grids for the evaluation,
Em- ployment, Youth and Sports, Health and sheets with the signature of applicants, report of
Culture at secondary and higher education levels,
■ Examination sessions…
and elabo- rated by a ministry through a process
that involves social partners as well. The
registration is done with- out an instruction by the
CNCP but the diploma was checked and
accredited by other officials authori- ties, such as
Commissions including social partners were
consulted.
FROM CONCEPTS TO IMPLEMENTATION
34 A HANDBOOK FOR NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORKS DEVELOPERS
Figure 9: The Registration of qualifications
PROCESS OF REGISTERING OF
QUALIFICATION TO THE FRENCH REGISTER
(Registration on request)
Regional National
Processing Processing
Information and Information to the providers on the
Guidance process Orientation of the
Registration request
Processing Body
Creation of the file by the Applying
Drafting of Provider
the
qualification Regional ProcessingNational Processing
file
Processing Body:
Processin Analyses the file
g Can ask for the expert advice or the state
department Drafts the summary document of the
file
35
Construction of FURTHER READINGS
qualifications ETF 2012, Qualifications Frameworks from concepts to
Quality of the standards, and especially of the assess- implementation, httep:www.etf.europa/webatt.nsf/o/
ment of competences is especially important to the Merryman J:H: 1985 The civil law tradition: an Introduc-
CNCP. If it is only a training course, without tion to the legal system of western Europe and Latin
coherence between all the elements, it is refused by America
the commis- sion. So the CNCP look at the analysis Geinert, W.D. Governance, Model of Training for Employ-
of statisitics co- horts to check if they fit with the ment: a European perspective, Comparative and Interna-
levels, with the kind of jobs held, the salaries, whether tional Education, vol 5, N° 3, pp 251-60.
the level of the job role corresponds to the level of the
Raffe, D. Towards a dynamic model of national qualifica-
qualification. tion framework. S Allais, D. Raffe and Michael Young
(eds), Researching NQFs: sme conceptual issues, Em-
All certification in the Register must include validation of
ployment Sector, Skills and Employability Department,
prior learning. The CNCP looks closely at the description International Labour Office, pp 23-42.
of the qualification and at the composition of the
CEDEFOP, ETF, UNESCO and UIL, 2013, Global National
board of examiners.
Qualifications Framework Inventory, prepared for ASEM
education ministers conference, Kuala Lumpur, 13-14
May 2013 (ASEMME 4)
The EQF also exercises a particular influence on - South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation
(SAARC).
other regional or transnational frameworks. Regional
initiatives such as the Southern African Development
Community Framework, the Caribbean Qualifications
Framework, the Southern Pacific Register, the 2. European Qualification
Transnational Qualifi- cations Framework of the Small Framework: Overview
States of the Common- wealth, the GCC initiative for a
Qualifications Framework for the Gulf Countries and the Strategic Context: Education and Training 2020 “Edu-
debate on the designated the ASEAN Qualifications cation and Training 2020” (ET 2020) is a new
Framework are influenced by the EQF (a finding of the strategic framework for European cooperation in
ETF study published in 2010, “Transnational education and training that builds on its predecessor,
Qualifications Frameworks”), and some are seeking to the “Education and Training 2010” (ET 2010) work
link to the EQF. In some cases, individual countries are programme. It pro- vides common strategic objectives
actively pursuing links with the EQF - New Zealand, for Member States, including a set of principles for
Australia, Canada and the United Arab Emir- ates are achieving these objec- tives, as well as common
examples. working methods with priority areas for each periodic
work cycle.
The EQF is an example of a QF whose effect has
been to encourage (even if this was not intentional in The EQF is unfolding in this strategic framework that pro-
its de- sign) convergence of systems – many new- vides 4 common strategic objectives for Member States,
generation NQFs resemble each other. They often including a set of principles, common working
have 8 levels, are lifelong learning in scope and, methods and priority areas:
fundamentally, based on a foundation of levels ■ making lifelong learning and mobility a reality (linked
descriptors written in learning outcomes. Other TQFs to the EQF)
more directly promote harmoni- sation, and in some,
■ improving the quality and efficiency of education
such as the Caribbean Qualifica- tions Framework,
and training
common qualifications are developed. We can probably
expect greater convergence, partially pushed by ■ promoting equity, social cohesion and active citizen-
globalisation and closer international coop- eration. ship
TQFs are both responses to globalisation and ■ enhancing creativity and innovation, including entre-
themselves globalising instruments. preneurship
The fundamental principles underpinning validation of The learning outcomes which define the reference levels
learning are as follow: are specified in three “categories”: knowledge, skills and
competence. This signals that qualifications capture a
■ Validation must be voluntary.
broad scope of learning outcomes - in different combina-
■ The privacy of individuals should be respected. tions. Qualifications may include theoretical knowledge,
■ Equal access and fair treatment should be guaran- practical and technical skills, and social competences
teed. where the ability to work with others will be crucial.
■ Stakeholders should be involved in establishing sys- There are two principal aims to the EQF instrument:
tems for validation.
■ to promote citizens’ mobility between countries
■ Systems should contain mechanisms for guidance
■ to facilitate their lifelong learning
and counselling of individuals.
■ Systems should be underpinned by quality assur- The EQF has 8 reference levels which “span the full
ance. scale of qualifications from basic to advanced”. It
“encom- passes” general, vocational and academic
■ The process, procedures and criteria for validation
education and training PLUS it “addresses”
must be fair, transparent and underpinned by quality
qualifications acquired in initial and continuing
assurance.
education and training.
■ Systems should respect the legitimate interests of
stakeholders and seek balanced participation. The basic structure of the EQF descriptors is shown be-
low:
■ The process of validation must be impartial and
avoid conflicts of interest. Knowledge Skills Competence
■ The professional competences of those who carry Factual Cognitive Autonomy
out assessments must be assured. Theoretical Practical Responsibility
The work on the Framework started in 2004 at the be- ■ Level 1 may be thought of as receding workplace
hest of the Member States. Initial proposals were devel- competence
oped by an expert group. The 3 descriptors defining ■ Levels 1-8 are concerned with “work or study”
the 8 levels of the EQF were developed between
■ Levels 5-8 are “comparable” with the descriptors for
2003 and 2008 in an extensive process building on
Higher Education
research and widespread consultation involving
experts and policy makers from all countries involved.
The EQF was ad- opted in 2008.
There are also criteria and procedures for self- EQF Level 6
certifica- tion against the Qualifications Framework for
Qualifications
Country A
Qualifications
EQF Level 5
Country B
the Euro- pean Higher Education Area: (EHEA)
EQF Level 4
Overall, the referencing process has been running
smoothly, illustrating that countries have taken on board EQF Level 3
the key elements of the EQF descriptors. So, while
the German level descriptors, for example, are based EQF Level 2
on a different concept of competence from the EQF
EQF Level 1
descrip-
Box 6: The debate on learning outcomes and European descriptors (Source CEDEFOP).
4. Irish Referencing
Findings
Report
There are different purposes between national frame-
Process works and regional framework, since the INQF designed
before the creation of the EQF, so national purposes
The National Qualifications Authority of Ireland (NQAI)
was more important than comparability. Yet, the Irish
established a steering committee comprising Qualifica-
acknowledge similarities in terms of their architecture,
tion and curriculum bodies and 3 international
including the categorisations of knowledge, skill and
experts. The Draft report was discussed with a wide
competence, and a common understandings of learning
group of stakeholders, including providers and learners,
outcomes. The irish framework was among the first to
ministry departments and social partners. The Final
be referenced to the EQF and to recognize a clear ra-
report was then prepared and agreed among national
tional for comparing the sets of Levels in NFQ and EQF.
quality assur- ance bodies and the Ministry of Education
and Science.
43
Box 7: Structure of the Irish referencing report and expected outcomes, as well as how they relate to
each other. In contrast, the level descriptors of the
1. Part 1 Introduction new NQFs have, from the outset, been designed to
Process on Referning the Irish NQF to the EQF combine national relevance with international
2. The Irish NQF and its Qualifications in Context comparability; the three approaches outlined signal
2.1. General Education different ways to ap- proach this balancing act. The
2.2. Further Eduction and Training first group of countries above, aligning their national
2.3. Higher Education and Training
level descriptors to the EQF, emphasises international
3. Criteria and Procedures to Referencing the NQF to the EQF
comparability as an ulti- mate goal, but runs the risk of
3.1 The EQF's Advisory Group Criteria and Procedures
limited national relevance.
3.2. The Irish Responses to the Criteria and Procedures
4. Matters Arising from the EQF Referencing Exercise
The EQF descriptors – on purpose using a general
5. Conclusions
lan- guage – may not be able to capture the complexities
6. Annexes
of a national qualification system. This limitation is
6.1. Steering Committee Members
6.2. Establishing the Correspondence between the illustrated by the fact that countries like Portugal and
Qualifications Levels in the Irish NQF and the EQF Croatia have developed lengthy guidelines to support
Appendices the use and interpretation of the national levels. The
1. Comparison of Irish Levels Indicators and EQF Levels second group of countries, broadening descriptors to
2. Comparison of threshold between levels in Irish NQF Levels include trans- versal skills and competences, does
Indicators and EQF Levels Descriptors this to strengthen the national relevance of descriptors
and to promote particular policies; the inclusion of key
INFQ and EQF share core design features. competences in the Finnish and Icelandic descriptors
■ They are comprehensive and integrated exemplifies this last aspect. The third group of
countries insisting on a holistic approach, largely
■ They are neutral in terms of formal/non-formal/infor-
expresses national traditions, concepts and values and
mal learning
may fear that the current use of learning outcomes - in
■ NFQ level indicators and EQF level descriptors particular the distinction between knowledge, skills and
read across all strands of learning outcomes – competence - may be applied in a way which leads to
the strands interrelate a ‘narrowing down’ of education and training and
■ In both Frameworks the outcomes for a given level lifelong learning strategies. This is an important point
build on and subsume the outcomes of the Levels as it underlines that learning outcomes and
beneath. qualifications are not merely technical constructs but
must be understood in a social and political context as
■ Key words or phrases are introduced as “threshold
well.
or distinguishing factors in the description of
learn- ing outcomes at each level. The referencing process reveals common tasks to be
carried out by EU countries with regards to their NQF:
5. Building on the ■ managing their qualifications frameworks: what is
Referencing Process and what is not acceptable as a qualification? are
partial qualifications to be included in the register,
Some lessons have been gained from the on-going if there is one? are new qualification types neces-
ref- erencing processes involving all european countries. sary to clarify the difference of levels or categories of
As analysed in the global Inventory, there seems to be qualifications?
differ- ent attitudes towards the EQF and in particular
■ establishing more progression within the NQF. Is
towards the learning outcomes which are sometimes
the framework allow vertical and horizontal mobility.
challenged. This redefinition of the competence
How much integration is possible.
descriptors can be interpreted as an implicit criticism
of weaknesses in the original EQF design but also as ■ communicating about qualifications: is the language
an effort to reflect nation- al objectives and priorities. of learning (learning outcomes, assessment, quaity
The level descriptors of the early national assurance) being disseminated or does it remain the
qualifications frameworks were designed to serve language of a few.
national purposes. Their task was to show how ■ evaluating how learning outcomes are understood
qualifications can be differentiated in terms of complexity and used in the framework: learning outcomes
should not be treated as merely technical con-
FROM CONCEPTS TO IMPLEMENTATION
44 A HANDBOOK FOR NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORKS DEVELOPERS
structs, but need to reflect and respect the social wider competence) clearer than is currently the case.
and institutional contexts they are operating within. If This can facilitate the involvement and feedback of la-
learning outcomes are formulated in too narrow and bour market stakeholders regarding the relevance of the
restricted ways, they can limit rather than qualifications standards for the labour market.
broaden expectations towards learners.
■ explaining and using qualification levels in different Learning Outcomes features:
contexts: if learning outcomes are used differently
■ Statements of what a learner can be expected to
between institutions, sectors and countries, their
know, understand and/or do as a result of a learning
ability to strengthen transparency and aid
experience.
compari- son is weakened.
■ Student learning outcomes are properly defined in
■ extending the forms of recognition of qualifications
terms of knowledge, skills, and abilities that a stu-
■ securing the involvement and commitment of stake- dent has attained at the end (or as a result) of his or
holders her engagement in a particular set of higher educa-
■ establishing quality assurance systems which are tion experiences.
the basis of trust between countries ■ Learning outcomes are statements that specify what
a learner will know or be able to do as a result of
a learning activity. Outcomes are usually expressed
6. SKYPE SESSION as knowledge, skills, or attitudes.
The European Qualifications ■ Learning outcomes (are) specific measurable
Framework Experience achievements
(Aileen Ponton) ■ Reflections on the use of EQF for non- EU countries
a. EQF descriptors
EQF REFERENCING CRITERIA were developed to
b. Current reflections on the use of EQF outside
broadly compare with the self assessment process for
Europe
Bologna and higher education. They have not
c. The Scottish experience changed but the guidance in working with them has
evolved. What follows is a draft process for third
countries to use them to “align” or “benchmark” as
a. EQF Learning Descriptors
part of a pilot project
They are Knowledge (Theoretical or Factual), skills (cog-
nitive and practical) and Competence (Responsibility and
Autonomy).
b. Current reflections on the use
of EQF outside Europe
Box 8: The Scottish and Indian levels descriptors
Current EQF criterion
SCQF LD INDIA LD
Knowledge and Understanding Process required 1. The responsibilities and/or legal competence
Practice/applied Knowledge Professional knowledge of all relevant national bodies involved in the
Generic Cognitive Sills Professional skills referencing process, including the National Co-
Communications/ICT/Numeracy Core skill ordination Point, are clearly determined and
Autonomy/Working With Others Responsibility published by the competent public authorities.
In addition the structure of the education and
EQF Definition training system is described
http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/Files/Using_
learning_outcomes.pdf Proposed amplification guidance
In the broadest sense, the use of learning outcomes has
a technical purpose, for example, to make existing stan-
WHAT
dards (expectations in terms of knowledge, skills and The Government of the country should set out clearly
which organisations have responsibility for the develop-
45
ment and maintenance of the QF and for the quality FROM CONCEPTS TO IMPLEMENTATION
A HANDBOOK FOR NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORKS DEVELOPERS
46
as- surance associated with it.
WHY
WHAT
WHY
WHAT
WHAT
WHY
WHAT
WHY
At this stage, there is yet no final referencing report. ■ Co-ordination across the UK
■ Concerns in Scotland re lowest level of EQF and
messages for learners
47
■ Communication of NQF
FURTHER
■ Links to sectoral frameworks
READING
EQF Recommendation
■ Potential for overtrading/misunderstanding
2008
Global Inventory of Regional And National
CURRENT POSITION- the SCQF Database now shows
Qualifications Frameworks, 2015 Or
SCQF and EQF levels for all programmes. Scotland is
contributing to the dialogue around third country align- Mehaut, P and Winch, C, 2012, the European
ment – technical expert for Australia – but this is early Qualification Framework: Skills Competences or
Knowledge European Educational Research Journal,
days. We are also contributing to the work looking at
vol 11, n° 3
international or “stateless” qualifications. We provided
expert support to Poland, Belgium, Estonia. Scotland
has signed a MoU with Hong Kong and with Bahrain.
1. CREDIT SYSTEMS 50
2. EUROPEAN CREDIT SYSTEM FOR VOCATIONAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING 52
3. Skype Session: DEVELOPING A POLICY ON CREDIT SYSTEMS (JAMES KEEVY)* 55
CAT can unfold at different levels And within different types of qualification frame-
works:
CAT Schemes
Qualification Frameworks
eg in a single University an a
Institutional single awarding body
eg Higher Education TVET
Sectoral Single occupational sector
eg with the Tertiary sector
Sectoral a single occupational sector
Single, unified framework Tightly
National A common standard used across and National
Comprehensive linked subframeworks Loosely
Comprehensive between sectors linked subframeworks
Used as a basis for collaboration within Regional/ Mainly used as points of reference / for
Institutional comparisons
sectors Transnational
The table below shows how credit systems combine with qualification frameworks
1 2 3 4
CS CQF
QFQFCS
ECVET relies on a series of common goals, principles To be taken into account a unit specifications should in-
and technical components, that centre on the recog- clude:
nition of learning outcomes and achievements for Eu- ■ the unit title
ropean citizens undertaking vocational education and
■ the title of the qualification(s) to which the unit re-
training, irrespective of the learning context, location
lates
or delivery method. ECVET works hand in hand with
the European Qualifications Framework (EQF) to ■ NQF/EQF level and ECVET credit points of these
provide greater transparency in European qualifications, qualification(s)
promot- ing the mobility of workers and learners, and ■ the learning outcomes contained in the unit
facilitating lifelong learning. ECVET brings together a
■ the procedures and criteria for assessment of the
wide range of actors, at both national and European
learning outcomes
levels, with a view
■ the ECVET points (& EQF Level?) of the unit
Figure 13: ECVET Model
■ the currency/”validity in time” of the unit, where
rel- evant.
Learning context Units/Learning
A Outcomes The credit system can translate from one country to
validated and an- other (figure 15).
recognised
Learning Outcomes Credit awarded
assessed and credit for transfer.
awarded for Qualification
accumulation awarded.
Qualification
awarded and/or
transcript issued Learning context
B
53
Figure 15: Translation of credit system between countries. Country A EQF + ECVET Country B
Levels Levels
Country A EQF + ECVET Country B
EQF level
8
“Diploma “Adv. Diploma
12 8 10 in 60 ECVET in
levels levels levels Management” points @ EQF Management”
120 A-points level 7 150 B-points at
at level All level B9
120 60 150 “Diploma EQF level 6 “Diploma
credits credits credits 150 ECVET
in Cares” points in Cares”
per year 2X2.5 per year X per year 300 A- 300 A-
@ EQF level 5
points EQF level points
at level A8 4 at level A8
EQF level
Country Country 3
“Carpentry “Intro. Award
A B 18 ECVET
Certificate” 36 in Carpentry”
A Points B Points
“Diploma in Advanced. A-points at points @ EQF 45 B-points
Manage- ment” Diploma in level A4 level 2 at level B3
120 A-points at Management” 150
EQF level 1
level All 8-points at level
“Diploma in Care” B9
“Certificate in Care”
300 A-points 375 8-points at level
at level AB B6 Transferring ECVET Points
“Carpentry “Introductory Arrangements for the transfer of credits between
Certificate” 36 A- Award in differ- ent VET systems will be agreed in a
points at level A4 Carpentry” 45 8- “memorandum of understanding” which will specify
points At level B3
the scope and range of transfer. The credit transferred
in practice may be dif- ferent from the systems credit
value of the learning.
Country A EQF Country B
Levels Levels
NSQF NOTIFICATION
55
3. Occupational Qualifications Sub-framework (OQSF)
Figure 18: Core principles
overseen by the QCTO (Quality Council for Trade
and Occupations)
5 Higher Certificate Occupational ■ Directly address CAT-related challenges faced with- in the
Certificate (Level 5) education and training system
4 National Certificate Occupational ■ Specify the roles and functions of bodies involved in CAT
Certificate (Level 4)
■ Promote the collaborative development of curricu- ■ Actively promote the recognition of workplace expe-
lum and qualification pathways rience and provide for CAT in collaboration with the
Quality Councils
■ Actively promote the recognition of workplace expe-
rience for CAT
■ Develop linkages for articulation and progression to Conclusion
promote CAT
■ The relationship between CAT and an NQF must be
Responsibility of Providers clearly defined:
- Do the two systems exist alongside each other?
■ Demonstrate that their policies and practices for all
types of articulation support the principles - Is CAT part of the NQF (as in South Africa or in
India)?
■ Seek accreditation by the relevant Quality Council(s)
■ Adequate consultation results in effective implemen-
■ In the case of private education providers be regis-
tation
tered by the Department of Higher Education and
Training ■ A strong conceptual basis must underpin the policy
57
FURTHER READINGS
EUROPA - Education and Training - Socrates programme - ECTS - European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System
Ordinance 21/30 September 2004 for Application of Credit Transfer and Accumulation System in Higher education institutions,
Ministry of education and science, Bulgaria, page 2”. Retrieved 15 April 2014.
Linking Credit systems and qualifications frameworks- An international analysis. 2010 CEDEFOP publications
1. APPROACH 60
2. WHAT IS QUALITY ASSURANCE? 60
3. THE QUALITY CYCLE 63
4. COMPONENTS OF A QUALITY ASSURANCE FRAMEWORK 64
5. QUALITY ASSURANCE IN THE INDIAN CONTEXT 66
6. Skype Session: THE SUCCESS STORY OF THE DUAL SYSTEM IN GERMANY
(HELENA SEBAG-DEQA-VET)* 67
* Helena SEBAG is Project Manager at DEQA-VET, the German reference point for quality assurance in vocational education and training.
1. Approach ■ Provide the appropriate measuring tools so that
states and providers can monitor and evaluate their
Building an integrated qualification and skill system performance
re- quires clear linkages between industry needs and
skills outcomes for individuals. In VET systems, the
quality as- surance framework is likely to have four key
2. What is
objectives: Quality
■ Improve employability of the workforce ( both poten- Assurance?
tial and actual)
Technical Vocational Education and Training (TVET)
■ Better matching between training supply and de- equips people with knowledge, skills and/or competenc-
mand es required in particular occupations or more broadly
■ Better access to VET, in particular to vulnerable in the labour market that are recognized as
or disengaged groups indispensable for meaningful participation in work and
life. Quality as- surance is a component of quality
■ Raising the status of VET ( bringing some equity
management and is ‘focused on providing confidence
with academic/general education)
that quality require- ments will be fulfilled’ ( ISO
Quality assurance has proved to be a decisive tool for 9000:2006 norms specifies Quality management
both modernising and improving the performance and systems fundamentals and vocab- ulary). Quality
status of VET systems in Europe and elsewhere. In order control is a component of QA defined as a set of
to ensure VET systems are responsive to labour market activities or techniques to ensure that all quality
skills needs, outcomes must match demand and this requirements are being met. In order to achieve this pur-
requires the supply side of VET systems to be closely pose, processes are monitored and performance
linked to industry and to deliver what industry needs prob- lems are solved. Quality improvement refers to
through training programmes and qualifications (see box anything that enhances an organisation’s ability to
8: Why focus on quality?). meet quality requirements.
A common QA framework needs to: The concept of Quality is evolving from ‘conforming to
the standards and specifications of a product’ to qual-
■ Cover all aspects of planning, implementing, evalu-
ity is to fulfill the requirements of customers and
ating and reviewing VET at all levels in the system
satisfy them’. While quality control fits assembly line
■ Have an appropriate way of reviewing performance, control
including self-assessment; and feeding this back - ‘product-focused’ –in supply led system, quality as-
into the system in order to ensure continuous im- surance is user-oriented: quality is determined and con-
provement trolled at all stages of the whole product lifetime - fitness
■ Include monitoring ( external) at both national and for purpose of user as judged by the users
state level
Quality assurance integrates the ‘hard side’ elements
(that is, statistical methods, quality control tools, pro-
Box 11: What is Quality
cess standardisation, and improvement, etc.) with the
‘soft side’ aspects (that is, quality concept, employees’
• Quality is not an easily and well defined concept:
participation, education and training, and quality culture,
• In general terms, a service or a product is considered of
etc.)
high quality, if it fulfills or even surpasses our expecta-
tions ie: is it fit for purpose?
Reform of TVET towards excellence necessitates that
• Different stakeholders with different interests and
expectations perceive quality in different way
TVET decision makers, policy developers, providers and
key stakeholders consider three core QA functions:
• In skills systems around the world quality is
defined, understood and measured in different ■ defining quality
ways
■ measuring quality and
• Skill systems make choices about the indicators used
to measure their efforts to achieve quality and what ■ improving quality
relative priority will be placed on the different chosen
indicators A TVET Quality Framework describes how the system
and components of the system:
■ define quality - inputs (e.g. training of teachers/
trainers) -processes (e.g. how access to TVET is
FROM CONCEPTS TO IMPLEMENTATION
60 A HANDBOOK FOR NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORKS DEVELOPERS
lar, for disadvantaged people. It states clear
Why focus on quality objectives for further development, which need to be
• High quality programs provide strong links between continuously reviewed and adapted, according to
institutions and the needs of the labour market ie: experiences gained in technological and pedagogical
graduates are more likely to find suitable
employment innovations and ongo- ing evolution of work. A quality
framework (Figure 19) presupposes agreement on
• High quality programs make TVET more attractive and
give status several methodological and procedural principles,
• A focus on quality provides accountability measures that which will guide its implementa- tion.
can be linked to funding and performance management
in a skills system
Figure 19: Features of a Quality Framework
• Quality systems serve as a common reference to ensure
consistency amongst different actors at all levels.
• Quality systems have transparent processes and Mission How do we define Quality? What is
procedures to ensure mutual understanding and trust Stateme our concern?
between different actors nt
• skill standards are developed with meaningful
inputs from industry needs
Process What are our core processes and
• qualifications reflect labour market needs Manageme how do we design them?
• curricula meets the requirements of the labour market nt
• targets for the participation of disadvantaged groups
• training providers have strong links with employers
Evaluatio How can we check the results?
• teaching and training staff are well-qualified and famil- n
iar with workplace practices
• Assessors are well-qualified and familiar with
workplace practices How can we continuously improve
Continuous
• a high percentage of graduates obtain employment Improveme our results?
• facilities utilise the latest requirements and technologies nt
• there are low rate of non completion
A unified QA framework that can be used as a com-
mon reference across states, sectors and ministries and
promoted, teaching) - outcomes (e.g. how VET provides the structure within which all bodies
re- sponds to the changing demands of the labour operating across the VET system in India operate is a
mar- ket fundamen- tal requirement. Examples of such
■ Measure quality– Current TVET performance against frameworks can be found in VET systems across the
expected standards world and each has a set of common components.
■ Continually improve quality – closing the gap be- The first and most important component is a set of ob-
tween current and expected levels of quality - jectives to which all those with responsibility at any level
con- tinuous learning in the system sign up to and which are strategic enough
■ keep the methodology as simple as possible to reflect the policy objectives for the skills system in
In- dia. These objectives must be supported by and
■ Is sustainable economically, ecologically, socially
closely linked to a set of quality principles. Without a
TVET QA framework strengthens relevance of TVET out- clear set of objectives it is not possible to build a unified
comes to meet industry and employment approach to quality and quality assurance. The
requirements and improves the overall system, objectives provide the basis for all other components
eventually an improve- ment in the status of TVET within the system and importantly can be referenced to
overall as consistency in TVET graduate outcomes - ensure that the QA framework and operational
important factor in improving per- ceptions of TVET by systems that support it are meeting national
assuring consistency of outcomes. A TVET Quality objectives.
Assurance Framework places emphasis on the
Quality Objectives: The purpose of the quality objec-
improvement and evaluation of the outputs and
tives is to specify what the quality assurance system
outcomes of TVET in terms of increasing
aims to achieve. The objectives are more specific
employability, improving the match between demand
than goals and should serve as the basis for creating
and supply, and promoting better access to lifelong
policy and evaluating performance at a national, state or
learning, in particu-
organ-
61
isational level. The quality objectives should act as basic and associated quality assurance mechanisms are in-
tools that underlie all planning and strategic activities. troduced. Data collection and reporting systems
Quality Principles: Quality Principles form the frame- based on outcomes and outputs rather than input
work underpinning the quality assurance system. measures will be required in order to make full use of
They are statements, based on the objectives, that the indica- tors and these will need to be integrated into
should be applied to all schemes and strategies that operational processes required at both provider and
support qual- ity and quality improvement including systems level over time so that improvements can be
quality standards and operating processes. measured and evidence based.
The standards can cover the following: ■ Different quality indicators provide different informa-
tion so the choice of what indicators to use will
■ Assessment and Certification (Module 7)
de- pend on the priorities of the QA system
■ NQF Qualifications (Module 8)
Outcome indicators are a wide range of indicators
■ Teachers and Trainers (Module 9).
used to measure quality in skills systems at both the
■ Training Providers (Module 10) level of training providers and the system as a whole.
They are the “harder side” of quality assurance as
National Indicators they are mainly measured quantitatively. Most
common indi- cators include:
National Indicators provide a tool to measure perfor-
■ Participation - how many from certain target groups
mance at a national, state or local level. The
indicators can be used to assess the quality of ■ Completion - how many finish a program
provision and the extent to which it is meeting the ■ Attainment - how many receive a qualification
quality objectives. Year on year they can provide a
■ Progression - how many move from one program or
useful measure in order to monitor improvement.
level to another
The indicators give one measure , they are not suffi- ■ Employment - how many are employed
cient on their own to describe what might be
■ Satisfaction - how satisfied are students and em-
happening across the whole VET system, They can
ployers
form the ba- sis for developing more detailed
performance measures and reporting systems that relate Process indicators are the “softer side” as they are as-
to the over-arching ob- jectives for the NSQF and VET. sessed qualitatively. They apply to all aspects of the
They can provide the ba- sis for describing skills system:
organisational performance at provider level, the
■ Qualifications / Certification – trust in consistency,
direction and achievements of the system at state and
robust processes
national level and help in the further develop- ment of
skills policy in order to improve outcomes for the VET ■ Competency Standards – wide consultation, mea-
system. surable outcomes
The quality cycle of the Eropean Quality Assurance Reference Framework for Vocational Education and Training
Key component QA Functional Requirement QA Body Role and Responsibilities Key Processes
NOS/job Provide up to date relevant skills Ensure standards reflect the needs of Collaboration with employers
description standards that meet employer needs employers and are useable and used to
Use of up to date LMI
in a particular sector underpin skills provision in VET
Regular monitoring and
Produce standards that can translate review of outcomes and
into relevant learning outcomes sector needs analysis
and competence requirements for
courses and qualifications Updating of standards
Accredited Provide up to date relevant Ensure accredited outcomes and qualifications Standard setting
Learning qualifications and accredited learning meet required standards and policy objectives
Outcomes and Regulation and/or
outcomes that meet employer needs for VET including NSQF requirements and
Qualifications accreditation of course and
( as reflected in NOS and LMI) specifications qualification developers
Ensure accredited outcomes and qualifications National Qualification register/
meet the needs of employers and provide database
opportunities for students to acquire
knowledge and skills needed to succeed Collaboration/engagement
with NOS developers and
Ensure accredited outcomes and qualifications
employers
are robust and maintain public and employer
confidence in outcomes for students Monitoring/inspection and
review (data, reporting)
Assessment and Provide accessible assessment Ensure assessment is appropriate, robust and Standard setting
Certification opportunities that are focussed on accessible to all learners Accreditation of certifying
skills and competence as well as Ensure quality processes are in place to ensure bodies
underpinning knowledge validity of outcomes across VET
Monitoring/ inspection
Provide accessible assessment Ensure the security of the validation and
opportunities for students that Review and reporting
certification scheme/s for VET
meet their circumstances and
requirements including for RPL Ensure the status of certification and public
confidence in this
Provide assessment opportunities
that are relevant to NOS and NSQF
requirements
Provide a robust certification scheme
that incorporates outcomes from a
range of assessment opportunities
including RPL
Student Student outcomes are relevant and of Ensure all student outcomes from both Data collection on outcomes
Outcomes high quality accredited provision and qualifications is Continuous review against
relevant to employers and provides a platform
skills requirements ( LMI and
for progression either to further education, NOS)
training or employment.
For accredited courses the establishment of a QA ■ Development of qualifications that meet the require-
process of planning, implementation and review ments for the NSQF including assigning a level
that ensures only approved bodies which meet within the NSQF, assigning credit ( where relevant
national standards are responsible for: to qualifications and units/modules) and titling and
other technical requirements specified by the NSQF
■ Development of accredited courses based on NOS
or units of competency as defined by industry and ■ Development of accredited outcomes and qualifica-
with clearly specified learning outcomes tions and associated assessment requirements that
meet NSQF standards and policy objectives for VET
■ Ensuring courses are designed to lead to a recog-
nised NSQF qualification or certificated outcome ■ Maintenance and review of qualifications and quali-
fication outcomes to ensure accredited outcomes
65
and qualifications are robust and maintain public ■ Use a team-based approach to prioritize improve-
and employer confidence in outcomes for students ments and implement them
■ Provision of accurate and timely data on qualifica- ■ Develop and agree on a plan on how the
tions and student achievement improve- ment activities will be implemented
For training providers the establishment of a QA ■ Involve stakeholders/ clients since they bring valu-
process of planning, implementation and review able ideas based on their experiences in
that ensures that only approved providers which receiving and delivering services
meet national standards for delivery, including ■ Build motivation for quality improvement - a vision
teaching and learning are responsible for: for quality
■ Providing relevant, up to date and high quality ■ Establish quality improvement teams
teaching and learning opportunities for students
■ Dedicate time to measure performance
■ Establishing processes for continuous improvement
■ Provide time to openly discuss successes and fail-
of training and assessment based on outcomes and
ures
equity for students
■ Ensuring the quality of both inputs and outcomes
in all areas of teaching and learning through 5. Quality Assurance in
processes of teaching and assessment the Indian Context
■ Monitoring and regular review of teaching, learning,
There are many arrangement currently existing in India,
assessment and student outcomes
which can be used as a basis for a national QA
■ Provision of accurate and timely data on student system. A national policy and guidelines are being
outcomes and satisfaction ratings proposed by the India-EU project and are currently
under consider- ation. Interrim arrangements can be
For assessment and certification the establishment
based on improve- ment of current approaches, whilst
of a QA process of planning, implementation and
not slowing down training and assessment provision.
re- view that ensures that only approved bodies
There are ‘low hang- ing fruit’ that can assist in getting
which meet national standards are responsible for:
started. Some indica- tors are already used. The main
■ Development of assessment opportunities that are issue is coordination: working together.
focussed on skills and competence as well as un-
derpinning knowledge The current arrangements for QA across all aspects
of vocational education and training in India are
■ Provide accessible assessment opportunities for
complex. There are 3 key structural elements that
students that meet their circumstances and require-
make this the case:
ments including for RPL
■ The current separation of vocational education
■ Provide assessment opportunities that are relevant
(largely undertaken through the MHRD) and
to NOS and NSQF requirements
voca- tional training ( now under the Ministry of
■ Ensure quality processes are in place to ensure va- skills)
lidity of outcomes
■ State autonomy versus national requirements
■ Provide a robust certification scheme that incorpo-
■ Differences in practice between the public and pri-
rates outcomes from a range of assessment oppor-
vate provision of VET and the formal and informal
tunities including RPL
skills and employment sectors
■ Ensure the status of certification and public confi-
dence in this The policy requirements now in place to meet
challeng- ing skills targets for all sectors puts an
■ Monitoring and regular review of assessment re-
additional pres- sure on ensuring that not only are
quirements and certification processes
targets met in relation to volume but that the reforms and
Quality improvement-focused organisations changes improve the quality and relevance of skills
training in India. This is not a unique set of
■ Provide staff the training and tools they need to
circumstances. The reform of VET across Europe and
measure and improve services, consultations, train-
elsewhere has required consideration of au- tonomous
ing and assessment provision
systems already in place across nations and states.
FURTHER READINGS
CEDEFOP, 2009. The relationship between quality assurance and VET certification in the EU Member States. Luxembourg, EU
Publication Office
W. Van den Berghe, 1996, Quality Issues and Trends in Vocational Education and Training in Europe. Publication of the CEDEFOP.
Notwithstanding the importance of quality assurance, In addition, a quality assurance model will operate at
the role of the assessment practitioner engaged atevery the level of Assessment Practitioners, covering their
stage of the lifecycle is critical. This staged approach al- re- cruitment, training, standardisation activity,
lows for the clear articulation of functional deployment, monitoring, reviewing and, finally, the
responsibility which, in turn, may be grouped into evaluation of their performance. For each activity,
defined job roles and responsibilities. clearly articulated pro- cesses and criteria will be in
place against which As- sessment Practitioners will be
Quality control and quality managed and supported.
6. Where more than one a/body involved, how do we know the assess- • Draft an Assessment Guidelines capturing the re-
ments are comparable? quired stages of the lifecycle
7. Are the Assessment practitioners appropriately trained & supported? • Review & evaluate existing practice re robustness,
scalability, continuous improvement
8. Are the posted results valid & reliable?
• Train assessment practitioners in line with
9. Where more than one a/body involved, how do we know the assess- acknowl- edged good assessment practice
ments are comparable?
• Introduce systematic reporting to assist accountabil-
10. Are the Assessment practitioners appropriately trained & supported? ity & transparency
11. Are the posted results valid & reliable? • Use standardised procedures & documentation with
12. Where more than one a/body involved, how do we know the assess- regard to assessment practitioners: recruitment,
ments are comparable? training, deployment, monitoring
13. Are the Assessment practitioners appropriately trained & supported? • Monitor and review practice
14. Are the posted results valid & reliable? • Promote informal networking of assessment bodies
and of assessment personnel
4. Regulation of
Qualifications in the
UK: tor, the head of Ofsted, the independent monitoring/
review body of publicly funded education & training, is
A Briefing Note accountable. Both bodies, therefore, are seen to provide
an invaluable, independent role by overseeing the quality
(To note that there is no single over-arching
of publicly funded education, training & the certificated
regulatory system in the UK: responsibility for this is
outcomes achieved by learners and trainees.
delegated to the level of the country concerned,
although, in practice, each regulator follows similar, if There are almost 200 regulated organisations in Eng-
not identical, practice. This background briefing note land. These vary from small, specialist, sector-specific
refers to the regulation of Vocational Qualifications in awarding organisations to very large, multi-sector, inter-
England) national organisations, such as Pearson. They are all re-
quired, however, to demonstrate compliance in line with
Regulation Ofqual’s requirements.
Regulation of qualifications in England is effected via The awarding & qualifications’ sector in England - and
the regulation of the organisations that design, devel- the UK generally - operates as a market. Educational
op, operate and award the qualifications. The focus of and training providers, including employers, exercise
regulation is therefore strategic, putting the onus on choice when selecting the most appropriate qualifica-
the organisation to prove that it meets - and continues tion to meet the needs of their learners/trainers/employ-
to meet - the regulatory criteria. The regulator, Ofqual, ees. If the course is to be funded from the public
exer- cises oversight through initial approval and on- purse, however, then the provider must ensure the
going au- dit, including a requirement that regulated qualification chosen is both one offered by a regulated
organisations submit annual Statements of Compliance. awarding or- ganisation and is on the central
Regulated or- ganisations are known as awarding government’s list of ‘ap- proved’ qualifications.
organisations. Once regulated - recognised is the
official term - the awarding
FROM CONCEPTS TO IMPLEMENTATION
76 A HANDBOOK FOR NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORKS DEVELOPERS
Central Government’s role in the qualifications & award- qualifications to Ofqual’s qualification register as well
ing business - beyond policy development - is limited as to the approved lists operated by both DfE and
to that of determining which qualifications- and courses - BIS, has focussed more and more on the nature and
it will fund from the public purse. The funding is for both extent of employer involvement/engagement in the
the course delivery and payment of the qualification fee. design & development process of the qualification.
Two government departments are relevant here: the The onus is therefore on the awarding organisation to
Dept for Ed (DfE) which has responsibility for 14-18 put consider- able effort into establishing, maintaining
learners and the qualifications they take, as well as and enhancing their direct links with industry, at the
shared respon- sibility for Apprenticeship programmes level of both indi- vidual employer as well as their
and the associ- ated qualifications; the Dept for representative bodies, such as SSCs.
Business, Innovation & Skills, (BIS), which shares
responsibility for Apprentice- ships and has sole The role of the regulator, Ofqual, and the additional
responsibility for adult training, skills development and re- quirements laid down by the government of the
the qualifications/courses considered critical for older day via its ‘approved for funding lists’ are, between
learners. Both Depts publish annual lists via their them, in- tended to safeguard the public when making
agencies of which qualifications are eligible for public choices in the awarding & qualification market.
funding. In practice, the content of such lists re- flects
Isabel Sutcliffe (Isabel.Sutcliffe@Pearson.com)
Government’s current education/skills develop- ment
13/2/15
priorities.
79
We are planning to introduce a new framework for regu- stand and be able to do for specific roles.
lated qualifications that will: Expectations about what qualifications can and should
■ retain the levels, but introduce new level descriptors be expected to do must be managed. Considering the
■ introduce a consistent way of describing the size important of as- sessment in qualifications, building
of qualifications – which is the time it typically assessment exper- tise into the system is urgent,
takes learners to complete a qualification especially the assessment of generic skills, including
the ‘softer skills’ employers value, alongside technical
■ help people understand the range of qualifications
skills. It is not easy to achieve an appropriate balance
on offer - but it can only provide partial
between reliability, validity and manageability
information
(including cost), avoiding inappropriate statements
The main challenges are to make sure that the qualifica- about the ‘equivalence’ of different qualifica- tions.
tion covers the right content to the right standard,
OfQUAL strives to fulfil its role in a wider national and
espe- cially when there isn’t a common, clearly
international system.
described view within a sector about what people
must know, under-
FURTHER READING
Eurydice (2008). Levels of autonomy and responsibilities of teachers in Europe. Brussels: Eurydice. Available from Internet: http://
eacea.ec.europa.eu/ressources/eurydice/pdf/0_integral/094EN.pdf [cited 16.2.2009].
Further Education and Training Awards Council - FETAC (2006). Monitoring: policy [online]. Available from Internet: http://www.
fetac.ie/monitoring/Monitoring_Policy_March_06.pdf [cited 16.2.2009].
Lennartz, D. The examinations field of action: interim evaluation and future prospects. BWP, Special edition, 2005, p. 32-
37. Available from Internet: http://www.bibb.de/dokumente/pdf/a1_bwp_special-edition_lennartz.pdf [cited 16.2.2009].
Ministère de l’Éducation Nationale (2008). BTS Conception et Industrialisation en Microtechniques: Annex II. Le Bulletin Officiel
du Ministère de l’Enseignement Supérieur et de la Recherche, 21, 22 May 2008, p. 1070. Available from Internet: ftp://trf.educa-
tion.gouv.fr/pub/edutel/bo/2008/21/annexe_ESRS0807889A.pdf [cited 16.2.2009].
Quinn, David (2006). Are all our children really such geniuses? The Sunday Times, August 20, 2006 [online]. Available from
Internet: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article614322.ece [cited 16.2.2009].
Reuling, J.; Hanf, G. (2003). New forms of co-operation between institutions and stakeholders in continuing IT Training to pro-
mote lifelong learning. Working paper for the meeting of the thematic issue group 3, ‘Co-operation of different institutions and
stakeholders of qualifications systems’, Turin, 16-17 June, 2003 [online]. Available from Internet: http://www.bibb.de/de/7043.
htm [cited 16.2.2009].
FROM CONCEPTS TO IMPLEMENTATION
80 A HANDBOOK FOR NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORKS DEVELOPERS
MODULE 8
QUALITY
ASSURANCE OF
QUALIFICATIONS
GREECE Educational standards Educational standards are used by the awarding body (theoretical part) and
providers (practical part) to design assessment. However, their use for assess-
ment is not regulated.
SPAIN Educational standards (módulos These standards define the education and training content, the competences
formatives) to be achieved and the assessment criteria.
FINLAND Educational standards Assessment is based on the standards defined in curricula. Competence-
based qualifications: assessment standard
Competence-based qualifications contain the training and assessment stan-
dards.
FRANCE Assessment standards Assessment standards are defined as part of the qualification definition when
(référentiel de certiication) registered in the national repertory of qualifications.
For sectoral qualifications assessment is also based on assessment standards
IRELAND Qualification standards (as defined Award specifications contain a description of learning outcomes and of as-
in the award specifications) sessment techniques.
ROMANIA Qualification standards These define the competence to be achieved and the performance criteria for
assessment.
UK Assessment standards Based on occupational standards, all units within the qualifications and credit
framework (QCF) contain assessment criteria.
83
Box 12: NSQF curriculum package Qualifications are fit for purpose and ensure there are
no features in the design of the qualification that could
“Curriculum packages: the competency-based curricu- disadvantage any group of learners.
lum packages would consist of syllabus, student manual,
trainers guide, training manual, trainer qualifications, The qualification developer must build evidence of the
assessment and testing guidelines and multi-media pack- need for this qualification. This evidence may be gath-
age and e-material. This will be developed for each NSQF ered in answering the following questions:
level and when relevant for specific qualification packs
(QPs identified by the SSCs. This may be done by such
agencies as Ministries/Departments, Sector Skills Council Box 13: Questions from the Qualifications File
and Regulatory bodies may designate or any other body
in accordance with the NSQF.NSQF curricula should be
modular, allowing for skill accumulation and facilitating exit What evidence is there that the qualification is needed?
and entry. Curricula design will also be aligned to a credit
• the purpose of the qualification - eg designed to get
framework that reflects credit earned and competency
people into work, a qualification intended for people
acquired. Training of trainers would also be aligned to the
already in work, a qualification to allow people to add
NSQF.” (NSQF Notification).
new skills based on technological change.
Main timeline
ENGLAND
■ 2008, discussions on DQR
Main timeline begin
■ 1994, NQF, 5 levels (based ■ 2009, DQR basic grid outlined
on NVQ descriptors and
■ 2011, main consultation period ends, DQR formu-
broadened across VET but not HE
lated
■ 2004, New NQF (current), 8 levels, based on broad-
■ Appointment of working groups for four occupa-
er descriptors, potential for HE to be included.
tional areas: metal/electrical, IT, retail, health (16-20
■ 2008, QCF (current), 8 levels, new broader descrip- members each, representing all relevant stakehold-
tors, extensive, credit system, potential for HE to be ers)
included, validation procedures
■ 2012, final DQR launched and accepted
■ 2010, QCF linked to the EQF
■ 2013 DQR linked to EQF
■ Latest proposal, single QF, 8 levels, new descriptors
across 2 domains, inclusive of all non HE regulated Allocation of qualifications
qualifications. ■ A clear allocation of a qualification based on primary
sources often proved to be difficult and led to devia-
Allocation of qualifications tions of up to one NQF level.
Mainstream qualifications formed the basis of the levels, ■ Subsidiary criteria were taken into account, such as
awarding organisations make proposals for new qualifi- access requirements, duration of learning, field of
cations to be added (and removed). activity and position in company hierarchies, con-
sensus across educational sectors. Learning out-
comes, however, remained the decisive criterion for
SCOTLAND
allocation.
Main Timeline ■ Analysis of legal regulations and ordinances, curri-
■ 1998, SCQF, 12 levels, cula and study plans
based on partnership ■ Use of EU Guideline: Learning Outcomes
agreement http://ec.europa.eu/ploteus/sites/eac-eqf/files/
■ 2010, SCQF linked to EQF EQF_note4_en.pdf
■ 2012, level descriptors revised a little ■ Proposal for allocations of selected qualifications on
all levels (see form on next slide)
■ 2012, Credit rating opened up
■ Evaluation of the results and consultation by the
DQR steering committees
Cedefop (2008). The dynamics of qualifications – the definition and renewal of occupational and educational
standards [draft interim report for Cedefop]. Cedefop (2009). Terminology of European education and training
policy: a selection of 100 key terms [online]. Available from Internet: http
http://europass.cedefop.europa.eu/europass/home/hornav/Glossary/GlossaryApp.csp [cited 16.2.2009].
European Commission (2008a). Proposal for a recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council on
the establish- ment of the European credit system for vocational education and training (ECVET). (COM(2008) 180
final, 9.4.2008). Available from Internet: http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/educ/ecvet/com180_en.pdf
[cited 16.2.2009].
European Commission (2008b). Proposal for a recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council on
the establish- ment of a European quality assurance reference framework for vocational education and training.
(COM(2008) 179, 9.4.2008). Available from Internet:
http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2008:0179:FIN:EN:pdf [cited 16.2.2009].
89
MODULE 9
QUALITY
ASSURANCE FOR
TRAINERS AND
TEACHERS
1. TRAINERS AS STAKEHOLDERS 92
2. TRAINERS AS PROFESSIONALS 95
3. COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE 96
Teachers (which includes Trainers) are seen in their dou-
teacher roles are now changing.
ble role as professionals and stakeholders of vocational
training reform. Initial teacher education is perceived as
Professional roles are changing:
one among other levers to increase the professional per-
formance of vocational teachers. However, the main em- 1. Teachers will become lifelong and life-wide learning
phasis is placed on the dynamic interplay between facilitators instead of transmitters of isolated blocks
for- mal training and the huge variations as regards of expert knowledge and skills;
the real conditions of teaching practice in vocational
schools. The schools where teachers work are a 2. Several paradigm changes are taking place: new
crucial factor shaping the quality of their work. Emphasis public management, education management, voca-
is put on the crucial role of the continuing professional tional training policies and school management are
development (CPD) of teachers. CPD is much more changing.
than formal train- ing, and experience from EU countries
3. Learner needs and labour market requirements are
and pilot schools in transition countries indicates that it
changing and becoming more differentiated.
is both effective and affordable.
1. Trainers as Stakeholders 1. They have long been neglected but are now increas-
ingly appreciated;
In many countries, the roles of teachers and students
are in a process of change as a result of new 2. Vocational training reform is seen as an ongoing
approach- es to active learning. Responsibility is learning process;
shifting from the teacher to the learner and the
teacher becomes more an organiser and facilitator of 3. Reform increasingly requires articulation between
the learning processes than the transmitter of expert national and system authorities, and between
knowledge. Capacities for change and adaptation as local and school authorities;
well as learning-to-learn have become important
4. There is an increasing need for teachers to go be-
competences per se that learn- ers should develop. Self-
yond the classroom – into the school, the commu-
directed learning has become a necessity for an
nity, the vocational training system at large and even
increasing proportion of the population in rapidly
across borders;
changing societies. The experience of macro- reform,
including on reforms of qualification systems, if not 5. Teachers will have to become more actively en-
enough attention to the ‘micro’ level of classrooms, gaged in reform processes
teachers and students, tend to fail, even in already
‘de- veloped’ systems where the major needs concern
such issues as the quality and relevance of outputs, soft Why are teachers and trainers so important for
skills and life skills, etc. In many developing countries, systemic education and training reforms?
‘macro’ reforms address such fundamental issues as
legislative tools, funding systems, and improved Vocational training reform in most countries has led to
governance struc- tures. the redefinition, diversification and expansion of teacher
functions. In modern vocational training systems
Vocational schools are the key focus for any reform and effec- tive teaching depends not only on teaching
the continuing professional development of teachers as skills but on the ability to work in a team; collegiality is
well as school principals, configured in school-based in- a significant challenge for teachers. Another issue is
novative development projects, is probably the best way the need for teachers to re-conceptualise their own
to ensure sustainable, qualitative change in education position within vocational training. It is not enough for
systems. Unless teachers become professionals and teachers to ac- quire new skills and perform new
stakeholders of reform, it will be difficult to improve re- functions. Effective motivation of teachers requires that
sults in terms of education system performance. Modern they should fully un- derstand the reasons for change
vocational training systems, teachers are at the same (e.g. the NSQF) – mak- ing them their own. Many
time professional educators and key change agents. factors influence the chang- ing demands for
Continuing innovation and development has therefore professional knowledge, competence, practices and
become a core task of the modern professional voca- performance of teaching staff involved in vocational
tional teacher. The crucial challenge is that both of these training. Andreas Schleicher (2006) of the
FROM CONCEPTS TO IMPLEMENTATION
92 A HANDBOOK FOR NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORKS DEVELOPERS
OECD writes in the Lisbon Council Policy Brief that (2003) has said, it takes capacity to build capacity, and if
the most successful countries have something there is insufficient capacity to begin with it is useless to
fundamental in common: announce that a move to ‘professionalism’ provides
“…they have all shifted policy away from control over the the basis for a new approach. We can’t just move
resources and content of education toward a focus on from one phase to the next without deliberately
obtaining better outcomes. They have moved from building profes- sional capacity throughout the system.
“hit and miss” teaching practices to establishing Here the continu- ing professional development of
universal high standards. They have shifted from teachers must be the central response. Who, then,
uniformity in the system to embracing diversity and knows best what teachers should do, why, how, where
individualising learn- ing. They have changed from a and when? Most teachers would say that they do.
focus on provision to a focus on choice, and they They are the professionals who have a profound
have moved from a bureau- cratic approach towards knowledge of their field, based on both theoretical
devolving responsibilities and enabling outcomes, studies and a sound practice, know the stu- dents,
from talking about equity to deliver- ing equity. Most their needs and what is best for them; work in
important, they have put the empha- sis on creating accordance with professional standards and in the
a ‘knowledge-rich’ education system, in which best interests of the client (the students).
teachers and school principals act as partners and
According to this view they are the best placed to decide
have the authority to act, the necessary information to
where, when and with whom preparation should take
do so, and access to effective support systems to as-
place, and how and with what means teaching should
sist them in implementing change.”
be organised. But this point of view does not fit very
Teachers are rarely seen as subjects or as drivers of well into policymakers’ efforts to make both schools and
change. An almost universal experience in EU and teachers instruments to achieve strategic goals.
OECD countries in recent years has been that it has Anoth- er barrier to overcome is a tendency to reform
become increasingly difficult for policy alone to fatigue among teachers almost everywhere. Reforms
change practice. Paradoxically, precisely during and are in real- ity, and should also be perceived as, major
since the 1990s we have seen a resurgence in large social learn- ing processes, and today, more than ever
scale reform in most western countries, few of which before, the huge challenge is how to organise such
had much impact on student achievement levels. At policy learning activities in the coming years.
present, many OECD countries focus on policy and
An analysis of professionalisation strategies for teachers
systems development without paying enough
in EU countries points to the same need in all EU
attention to the management of implementation
coun- tries. Most changes are initiated from outside
processes (McLaughlin, 1990). A lesson learned here is
the voca- tional training system, either through
that, contrary to the one-to-one relation- ship
political decisions or as a result of pressure from
assumed to exist between policy and practice, the
industry. The Cedefop study on vocational teachers
nature, amount and pace of change at the local level
found that there is a ten- sion between change
is a product of local factors largely beyond the control
pressures and the response of teachers:
of higher-level policymakers (Hopkins, 2006).
“Often they challenge the teacher’s view of the voca-
Governments policy implementation has most com- tional training system, of their own role and of the way
monly used the school as the focus of intervention, they teach. And in some cases the changes contrast
yet international research evidence shows that we with the teachers’ ‘implicit’, ‘tacit’ knowledge of how
have to go even one level further down – to the best to behave in specific teaching situations. This
classroom – to improvement achievement. Increasingly situ- ation is made worse when government – or
strong evidence suggests that any strategy to promote manage- ment – fails to provide teachers with the
student learning needs must seek to engage students time, or the financial resources to retrain. Where
and parents as ac- tive participants, and expand the these resources are not available, teachers (and their
teaching and learning repertoires of teachers as well managers) will give priority to the needs of their
as students. This implies a transition from an era of students rather than to their own training. In short, and
top-down ‘prescription’ to an era of teacher as a result of all these factors, whole-hearted teacher
‘professionalism’. A new balance between top-down and acceptance cannot be taken for granted and teacher
bottom-up approaches must be found. resistance to change is one of the most significant
Educational factors must be rebalanced in pursuit of threats to the success of vocational training reform.”
quality. But how do we get there? As Michael Fullan
93
In the Cedefop study, a key recommendation for problem oriented work cultures. The continuing professional
policy- makers in EU countries is therefore that: There is development of
a grow- ing recognition that schools - and classrooms
- need to take the lead in the next stage of education
reform. The current focus on ‘personalisation’ is about
putting citi- zens at the heart of public services and
enabling them to have a say in the design and
improvement of the organ- isations that serve them. In
education this can be under- stood as personalised
learning (OECD, 2006), the trend towards tailoring
education to individual needs, interests and aptitude so
as to fulfil every young person’s poten- tial.
Personalised learning is about designing teaching,
curriculum and the school organisation to address the
needs of the students both individually and
collectively. It is a system that is more accessible,
open to the indi- vidual and involves the learners in their
own learning.
The diploma content includes: These standards apply across all areas.
Professional Values and Practice ■ Developing good practice in teaching own specialist
area
The teacher is committed to:
Planning for Learning
■ Learners, their progress and development, their
learning goals and aspirations and the experience Teachers are committed to:
they bring to their learning. ■ Planning to promote equality, support diversity
and to meet the aims and learning needs of
learners.
95
■ Learner participation in the planning of learning and have an opportunity to develop themselves
■ Evaluation of own effectiveness in planning learning perso- nally and professionally. Community of Practice
also fol- low the Social learning theory based on the work
Assessment for Learning
of psy- chologist Albert Bandera. He states that people
Teachers are committed to: learn:
■ Designing and using assessment as a tool for learn- ■ Through direct experience
ing and progression ■ Indirectly, by observing and modelling the behaviour
■ Assessing the work of learners in a fair and equi- of others with whom the person identifies (for ex-
table manner ample, how yound people see their peers behaving).
■ Learner involvement and shared responsibility in the ■ Through training that leads to confidence in being
assessment process able to carry ut behaviours. This specific condition
ias called self-efficacy, which includes the ability
■ Using feedback as a tool for learning and progres-
to overcome any barriers to performing the
sion
behaviour.
■ Working within the systems and quality require-
ments of the organisation in relation to Communities of practice are primarily a means of cat-
assessment and monitoring of learner progress. egorizing a particular set or web of relations between
people as having a particular identity, value
Access and progression orientation and purpose. Within a strong community of
practice, there is a strong sense of shared values and
Teachers are committed to:
beliefs; a consciousness of and a commitment to an
■ Encouraging learners to seek initial and further overall holis- tic purpose that shapes the activities of
learning opportunities and to use services within the the community; and an agreement on a set of
organisation practices that constitutes ”competent practice”. To
■ Providing support for learners within the boundaries some level, learning is always an induction into a
of the teacher role community whose boundary are marked by a
commitment to a set of beliefs about what counts as
■ Maintaining own professional knowledge in order to
knowledge and skills and what are ”good” values and
provide information on opportunities for progression
attitudes to underpin and infuse learning as a process
in own specialist area
of enlightenment, enhancement and attun- ement.
■ A multi-agency approach to supporting develop-
ment and progression opportunities for learners CoP take different forms such as formal or informal,
off-line or on line, with participants presence in a
lunch room or on a factory floor or as a virtual
3. Community of Practice community or network/wikis/dropbox/linkedin, etc.
CoP are not spe- cific to VET trainers; all subject
The notion of community of practice has become matters in general edu- cation and higher education
influ- ential within debates in education in the last 20 have their networks. What seems specific to VET
years: Lave and Wenger among the foremost exponents trainers is the purpose to bridge the knowing that and
of the concept offer the following definition of the the knowing how. Competence in VET is more located
concept: in the knowing-how (skills) than in the knowing-that
(knowledge), not because there is no knowledge
“A community of practice is a set of relations among per-
involved, but because knowledge is under- stood as
sons, activity and world over time and in relations with
embedded in gestures, behaviours and skills. The
other tangential and overlapping communities of prac-
transmission of skills meets specific challenges and
tice. A community of practice is an intrinsic condition
those are central in CoP for trainers. Trainers are also
for the existence of knowledge.” (Lave and Wenger,
keen to hear that they are not the only ones to experi-
1991).
ence challenges they experience daily in training situa-
Although not specific to the training and teaching tions.
func- tion, Community of Practices (CoP) play an
Successful CoP are those where individuals are prac-
important role in this area. CoP are typically developed
tioners willing to share with and to learn from others. it
by a group of people sharing a craft and/or a
is difficult to maintain a living CoP if people never
profession who sha- res information and experiences to
meet. But as CoP are born from voluntary initiatives,
learn from each other
and are not compulsary (although professional
standards do
FURTHER READINGS
Fullan M., The Moral Imperative of School Leadership, Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks, 2003
Hopkins, D., A Short Primer on System Leadership, Paper presented at the OECD Conference ‘International perspectives on School Leader-
ship for Systemic Improvement’, London, 6 July 2006
Lave, J. and Wenger, E., Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991
E. Wenger
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63rQ3S8EHoA
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrR1MSaXlLI
Erin explains what, who, how and why for higher education – but it’s applicaple for VET
Autralian
• Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FkYwKxPLDs
• Australian teachers talk about advantages of CoP
• Rubin, H Rubin, I. (1995) Qualificative interviewing: the art of hearing data, Los Angees, Sage Publication.
• Zammuner, V. (2003)II Focus Group: II Mulino
97
MODULE 10
QUALITY
ASSURANCE
OF TRAINING
PROVIDERS
* Stephen Auburn is Lead Auditor in VET quality framework for ASQA (Australian Skills Quality Authority)
1. Registering Approaches for quality assuring TPs.
Training Providers The provider has a defined continuous improvement
(TP) strategy that requires the collection and analysis of data.
The strategy includes implementation of continuous
Most nations have a process for gate keeping the
improvement activities for training and assessment.
approval or registration of training organisations.
An accredited training organisation collects, analyses,
However these processes vary in terms of level of
and acts on relevant data for continuous improvement
scrutiny, parameters reviewed, for example program
of training and assessment.
design, program materials, skills of practitioners,
program facilities; and complaints processes and An accredited training providers will develop quality
outcomes of graduates. standards and/or quality guidelines and will undergo
regular assessment either through self-evaluation of
Terminology matters: it is not the same thing to go
through approval and inspection approaches or a
through a registration process, an approval process,
combinations of those. The Information System is
an accreditation process or an affiliation process. The
often viewed as supplementary but it is very
difference lies in the degree of scrutiny the TP submitted
expensive to develop and to maintain, especially for
and in the range of services they are allowed to propose.
small training providers.
An affiliation process might be limited to recognizing the
existence of the TP, whereas an accreditation Quality standards for an accredited TP might look like
process might cover the right to develop official this:
qualifications.
1. The provider has strategies in place to provide quality (a) will meet the requirements of the relevant VET
training and assessment across all of its operations as accredited course;
follows: (b) will be conducted in accordance with the
1.1 Strategies for training and assessment meet the principles of assessment and the rules of
requirements of the relevant VET accredited course evidence;
and have been developed through effective consul- (c) will meet workplace and, where relevant,
tation with industry. regulatory requirements; and
1.2. Staff, facilities, equipment, and training and as- (d) is systematically validated.
sessment materials to be used by the provider
meet the requirements of the VET accredited
course and the provider’s own training and as- 2. The provider has strategies in place to adhere to the
sessment strategies and are developed through principles of access and equity and to
effective consultation with industry. maxi- mise outcomes for its students, as
1.3 The provider has a defined strategy, procedures follows:
and measures to ensure training and assessment 2.1. The provider has a strategy in place detailing how
services are conducted by trainers and assessors it will establish and meet the needs of students.
who: The organisation establishes the needs of clients,
(a) have the necessary training and assessment and delivers services to meet these needs.
competencies as determined by the National 2.2. The provider has a strategy in place for the
Quality Body; imple- mentation of continuous improvement of
(b) have the relevant vocational competencies at client services informed by the analysis of relevant
least to the level being delivered or assessed; data.
(c) can demonstrate current industry skills 2.3. The provider has in place a process and mecha-
directly relevant to the training/assessment nism to provide all students information about
being undertaken; and the training, assessment and support services to be
provided, and about their rights and obligations,
(d) continue to develop their vocational education
prior to enrolment or entering into an agreement.
and training (VET) knowledge and skills as
well as their industry currency and trainer/as- 2.4. Where identified in the learning and
sessor competence. assessment strategy, the provider has engaged or
has a defined strategy in place to engage with
1.4. The provider has a defined strategy and proce-
employers or oth- er parties who contribute to
dures in place to ensure that assessment, including
each learner’s training and assessment on the
Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL):
development, delivery and monitoring of training
and assessment.
2.5. The provider has a defined process and mecha-
nism in place to ensure learners receive training,
FROM CONCEPTS TO IMPLEMENTATION
100 A HANDBOOK FOR NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORKS DEVELOPERS
assessment and support services that meet their
individual needs. the National VET Regulator:
2.6. The provider has a defined process and mechanism (a) in the conduct of audits and the monitoring
in place to ensure learners have timely access to of its operations;
current and accurate records of their participation. (b) by providing accurate and timely data relevant
2.7. The provider has a defined complaints and appeals to measures of its performance;
process that will ensure learners’ complaints and (c) by providing information about significant
appeals are addressed effectively and efficiently. changes to its operations;
3. The provider has in place management systems that will (d) by providing information about significant
be responsive to the needs of clients, staff and stake- changes to its ownership; and
holders, and the environment in which the accredited
(e) in the retention, archiving, retrieval and trans-
provider will operate, as follows:
fer of records consistent withthe National VET
3.1. The provider has a strategy in place detailing how Regulator’s requirements
the management of its operations will ensure
6. Compliance with legislation
students receive the services detailed in their
agreement with the provider. 6.1 The provider identifies how it will comply with
relevant legislation and regulatory requirements
3.2. The provider has a defined strategy for the imple-
relevant to its intended operations and its intended
mentation of a systematic continuous improvement
scope of registration.
approach to the management of operations.
6.2 The provider identifies how it will inform staff and
3.3. Where applicable, the provider has a defined
clients of the legislative and regulatory require-
process and mechanism to monitor training and/
ments that affect their duties or participation in
or assessment services provided on its behalf to
vocational education and training.
ensure that it complies with all aspects of the VET
Quality Framework. 7. Strategy for certification, issuing and recognition of
qualifications & statements of attainment
3.4. The provider has a defined strategy and process
to manage records to ensure their accuracy and 7.1 The provider identifies how it will issue to persons
integrity. whom it has assessed as competent in accordance
with the requirements of the VET accredited course,
4. The provider has adequate governance arrangements, as a VET qualification or VET statement of attainment
follows: (as appropriate) that:
4.1 The provider must demonstrate to the National VET (a) meets the National Skills and Qualification
Regulator; Framework requirements;
(a) what its intended objectives as an accredited (b) identifies the accredited provider by its
VET provider are; na- tional provider number
(b) that it has undertaken business planning, and (c) includes any required national logo
(c) the continuing viability, including financial 7.2 The provider confirms that it will recognise the
viability, of its proposed operations. NQF and VET qualifications and VET statements of
attainment issued by any other accredited provider.
4.2 The provider must also demonstrate how it will
ensure the decision making of senior management 7.3 The provider retains client records of attainment of
is informed by the experiences of its trainers and units of competency and qualifications for a period
assessors. of 30 years.
4.3 The provider’s Chief Executive must identify how he 7.4 The provider identifies how it will provide returns
or she will ensure that it will comply with the VET of its client records of attainment of units of
Quality Framework and any national guidelines ap- competence and qualifications to the National VET
proved by the National Quality Body. This applies to Regulator on a regular basis, as determined by the
all of the operations within the provider’s intended National VET Regulator.
scope of operation. 7.5 The provider meets the requirements for implemen-
5. Interactions with the National VET Regulator ( these stan- tation of a national unique student identifier (if one
dards depend on the structure for the national Quality is identified).
Assurance system incorporating a Regulatory Body) 8. Strategy for accuracy and integrity of marketing
5.1 The application for registration must be accompa- The provider demonstrates that its proposed marketing
nied by a self-assessment report of the provider’s and advertising of NQF and VET qualifications to pro-
compliance with the VET Quality Framework. spective clients is ethical, accurate and consistent with
5.2 The provider’s Chief Executive must identify how its scope of registration.
it will ensure that the provider will co-operate with N.B. Standards relating to finance and insurance etc. will
need to be determined
01
Table 15: Examples of countries’ use of national standards for training providers:
Coverage Austria Sri Lanka Singapore New Zealand South Africa
a. Learning resources
b. Trainers and Managers
c. Facilities
d. Equipment
e. Assessment
f. Financial/governance
g. Graduates outomes
h. Students services
i. Employers and student satisfaction
AUSTRIA
trainers and assessors.
■ Quality seals (Qualitätssiegel) were introduced in Upper
• Continuous Improvement Review –ATO is expected to
Austria as an initiative of the Adult Education Forum, the
pursue continual improvement to uplift the quality of
umbrella organisation of all non-profit providers in the
design and delivery. WDA validates the internal quality
region. Criteria related to:
assurance system and capability of the ATO on a
• the nature of training regular basis.
• the qualifications of management and instructors
NEW ZEALAND
• the curriculum and physical facilities, and
■ Administered by the New Zealand Qualifications Authority
• feedback from students.
■ Responsible for the quality assurance of all education and
■ Based on criteria, certified auditors examine different training delivered outside universities
aspects of any organisation seeking a quality seal.
■ Key features: - Registration is a separate process to ap-
■ This system of self-regulation is now linked to the provin- proval and accreditation
cial government scheme of individual learning vouchers
• registration of providers, approval to deliver unit &
whereby vouchers only be used for training by organisa-
assess standards & qualifications from the National
tions with the seal.
Qualifications Framework
■ ARQA-VET, the Austrian Reference Point for Quality Assur-
• A letter of support Industry Training Organisation (ITO)
ance in Vocational Education and Training
or other standard-setting body
SRI LANKA • Evidence of compliance with ITO Accreditation and
Quality criteria identified by the Tertiary Vocational Education Moderation Actions Plans (AMAPs)
Council: • accreditation of other courses
■ Auditors, soon to include self-assessment • Industry Training Organisations (ITO) register work-
■ Registration of training providers
place assessors.
Self assessment is a major tool to identity opportunities 3. Response: assessment of applications, audits
for improvement on a continuous basis. It builds a and monitoring of training providers are sources
reflective practitioner approach (a culture of of risk information. The risk rating is used to
assessment). It is based on the selection of a site visit determine the scheduling and scope of audits and
team who designs and prepares site visit based on other monitor- ing mechanisms
the self-evaluation report. As showed in the table, the 4. Ongoing review: QA body will review any
result is either Accredited or Agreed Implementation information that may change the outcome of a
Plan. Under no circumstances should self- risk assessment.
assessment become an end in itself. Self-assessment
becomes all the more powerful when results are RISK ASSESSMENT RESPONSE:
transformed into a development plan. It aims at Rating Possible responses
measurement, whereas AQIP are aimed at quality Extreme Immediate action required by the QA body of a type
improvement. The agreed timelines must allow for determined appropriate by the QA body
High Intolerable risk. Applicant / training provider to be
realistic implementation.
audited and monitored. Other mitigation strategies
may also be applied (conditions placed on the
The risk assessment strategy determines the risk of non- training provider’s accreditation, etc) as deemed
compliance through regular monitoring and attention appropriate by the QA body
through audit, with the aim of improving performance Medium Risk mitigation through a program of audit
outcomes. It reduces the burden of administration and/or monitoring activity
and rewards training providers who are serious about Low Tolerable risk. No specific audit activity required
and may include a no audit option
quality. Specific operating context may also affect risk
- qualifications leading to licensed outcomes (such as
welding) may be assessed as high risk. Managing the 3. Audits
risk requires data collection and retrieval/ analysis. Risk
relates to the potential impact on the delivery of Audits serve a compliance approach – they measure
quality training and assessment services. whether quality standards are met or not met and
allow
Figure 24: Audit of Training Providers
E d
5
Star
Accredite
d
Accredite
d
4 Agreed Action AA
Star Plan P
3 Agreed Action AA
Star Plan P
2 Agreed Action AA
Star Plan P
1 Agreed Action AA
Star Plan P
On going professional development and continuous
improvement
03
monitoring of quality improvement. They are Trainers and Assessors
performed either by the regulating body or through a
third party. Auditors have to be trained and the The Standards establish the requirements for:
process need to be moderated. Many countries apply ■ Specified training and assessment qualifications
some form of risk assessment rating to minimise the
■ Vocational competency at least to the level being
audit burden but there are variations in
delivered and assessed
methodologies.
■ current industry skills directly relevant to delivery
Managing non compliance: how each nation
■ current knowledge and skills in vocational training
addresses issues arising with non-compliant providers
and learning
varies, as does the level of information provided to the
consumer in this regard. In New Zealand it is possible to Special requirements to those RTOs delivering training
view provider summary audit reports within the NZQA and assessment qualifications
website at the profile of each provider but these are
summaries and are included only if the private provider Auditors
approves. The Ontario College Quality Assurance
Based on ISO 19011 Guidelines for auditing
Service provides access to very brief executive
management systems
summary reports of public providers that include a
conclusion of the findings, determination of Standards for VET Regulators 2015 specify qualifications
compliance against their five criterion. for auditors:
■ Certificate IV in Training and Assessment (or its suc-
4. SKYPE Session cessor) and MUST include:
The VET Regulatory Journey • Design and develop assessment tools (or its
successor);
in Australia (Stephen Auburn)
• Design and develop learning strategies (or its
How training provider audits are undertaken and what successor); and
is involved • Lead assessment validation processes (or its
Standards for Registered Training Organisations successor).
(RTOs) 2015 ■ Diploma of Quality Auditing (or its successor) and
1. The RTO’s training and assessment strategies and MUST include:
practices are responsive to industry and learner • Participate in a quality audit (or its successor);
needs and meet the requirements of training • Initiate a quality audit (or its successor);
pack- ages and VET accredited courses
• Lead a quality audit (or its successor); and
2. The operations of the RTO are quality assured.
• Report on a quality audit (or its successor).
3. The RTO issues, maintains and accepts AQF cer-
tification documentation in accordance with these Types of audits
Standards and provides access to learner records. 1. Registration audit:
4. Accurate and accessible information about an RTO, • Initial registration as an RTO
its services and performance is available to
• Renewal of registration as an RTO
inform prospective and current learners and
clients • Change of scope of registration of an RTO
■ Uses Business rules for scoping an audit to inform • Different audit approaches may be used e.g.
size and scope of audit (which standards and which continuous improvement, student journey
training products on scope of registration to be ■ Undertakes desk audit of evidence requested (any
sampled) and which auditor/s might be best non-compliances identified are used to guide further
suited inquiry at the site audit – not an opportunity for
■ Determine desk audit or site audit the RTO to rectify non-compliances
Compliance with standards by existing RTOs - Audits of Existing RTOs 1 October 2013- 31 March 2014
120
100 97 98
90 91 90
89 88 89 89 88
8282
77 77 79
80 76
70 72
62
60 60
40
22 24
20
0
Quality Trailing and RTO is Governance CooperaƟve Compliance InsuranceFinancialProper Accurate and TransiƟon
training and student responsive with with management cerƟĮcaƟonethical from
assessment informaƟon to clients regulator legislaƟon markeƟng superseded
meeƟng student needs and course
stakeholders
SNR 15SNR 16SNR 17SNR 18SNR 19SNR 20SNR 21SNR 22SNR 23SNR 24SNR 25
Compliance at iniƟal audit Compliance following recƟĮcaƟon
■ Providers who want to comply with the National ■ The transactions-based regulatory approach is too
Standards but who experience some difficulty at slow a way to focus adequately on poor quality
least at initial audits (around 60% providers) pro- viders.
FURTHER READINGS
ISO 19011 Guidelines for auditing management systems
Standards for VET Regulators 2015
European Parliament; Council of the European Union (2009a). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of
18 June 2009 on the establishment of a European quality assurance reference framework for vocational education and training.
Official Journal of the European Union, C 155, 8.7.2009, pp. 1-9. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2
009:155:0001:0010:EN:PDF
HANDBOOK FOR VET PROVIDERS-Supporting internal quality management and quality culture, CEDEFOP 2015
Ishikawa, K. (1985). What is total quality control? The Japanese way. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Krueger, R. A. (1994). Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., Byosiére, P. (1994). A theory of organisational knowledge creation: understanding the dynamic process
of creating knowledge. In: Dierkes, M. et al. (eds) (2001). Handbook of organisational learning and knowledge. New York: Oxford
University Press, pp. 491-517.
07
MODULE 11
RECOGNITION OF
PRIOR LEARNING
Figure 26: Recognition model for RPL within the NSQF concept
NOS
QUALIFICATION
NOS 2
Learning / Skills & RPL
(Competency Based)
NOS 3 Element Knowledge
Outcome(s)
NOS 4
NOS 5
NOS 6 etcNon
formal
Learning
Competency based
assessment (CBA) Competency based
assessment (CBA)
ALL NOS
ONE or more NOS leve
■ A Qualification award
■ A Part qualification award • Review advisement result
■ A Record of credit against learning outcomes • Judge Evidence
ASSESSOR • Recommend Award or Further Verification
■ A Statement of recognition • Assessment or Learning Development
Advise
Portfolio
Brief & support candidate on Compilation:
•Candidate’s details Education
RPL, gathering evidence & Gather •
&Training History
compiling portfolio evidence/ •
Non-formal & informal
Process & benefits Compile Training/ development
Portfolio Employment History
Discuss Claims/Evidence
Discuss
Orientate Candidate to
Exit level outcomes
Orientate to Qualifications & relevant
Assessment criteria
Unit Standards Competency Standards
Competency evaluation &
Orientation Check Sheet
outcomes
Match Claims
Evaluate claims
• Complete match claims
Against Competency
Match per candidate per
Standards using instruments
Claims • occupation Complete Q
provided
• &A
Guides per Occupation
Assessor Guidelines
■ Evaluate the way in which the assessment was
The Assessor is the judge of the evidence provided by a conducted
candidate as their claim for recognition, following the Ad-
Review Evidence
visory/Evidence gathering process. In the first
instance the assessor will judge the Advisors The assessor will review the evidence presented, and
recommendations. Assessors are assisted in their accept or query the recommendations made by the
functions by the use of standardised ad- visor. Where the Assessor does not accept the
instruments/documents/ records. Asses- sors will be advisors recommendations, both the Advisor &
qualified against the Qualification/NOS for the Assessor must meet to clarify and agree the
Assessor & registered on the NDLR. following:-
15
■ The completeness of the Portfolio of Evidence and/or The assessor will record where insufficient evidence is
■ The relevance and sufficiency of the evidence pro- provided, and relate this to the appropriate Learning
vided Outcome. Each IAI will also contain guide questions and
■ Other related issues model or typical answers to assist in this process. As-
sessors should compile their own bank of assessment
■ A way forward
instruments, necessary to provide a quality assured evi-
Orientation dence judgement process. IAI’s will also contain
details and materials to enable a further verification
The assessor will conduct a comprehensive assessment to occur, where award judgements cannot
orientation to the Qualification/NOS or Learning be made due to non-complying evidence. These
Outcome against which the claim for recognition is further verification assessment assignments will
being made. This will be a more technical Orientation contain some or all of the following -
than that conducted by the advisor.
■ Drawings/pictures/other visual media containing the
■ The assessor will orientate the candidate to ensure detail of the assessment assignment
the candidate is fully aware of the requirements
■ Technical verification Question examples covering
re- lating to assessment criteria and quality
essential embedded knowledge
judgements that will be made by the assessor
■ Verification Question examples covering the re-
■ The results of the orientation stage are recorded
quired learning outcomes
as and signed off by the candidate and the
assessor. The RPL guides and instruments are based upon
■ Maintain this record as evidence judg- ing evidence of learning outcomes achieved
against the requirements of the relevant National
Plan & Implement Assessment Occupation Stan- dard. This can lead to a recognition
decision. The instru- ments the assessor will use will
It is critical that the candidate clearly understands the
assist in the judging of the evidence in an integrated
RPL assessment process, and their role in this process.
manner. All judgements will be recorded and depending
The candidate should be provided with detailed
on the scope of the assess- ment, a record of
Instruc- tions, either written or verbal, and the
judgement decisions against each Learning Outcome
assessor should ensure that sufficient resources are
within each National Occupation
available to support the implementation & judgement
Standard/Qualification.
process. The candidate will be briefed regarding
general and specific Instruc- tions to assist the Evidence Review Record
candidate understand what is required in the
presentation of the evidence and its evaluation/ An evidence review record provides the record of
judgement. The form/type of evidence judgement /as- deci- sions leading to a judgement, and is also a
sessment to be used will be agreed by the candidate record of such judgements. The Evidence review
and the assessor. In general, an assessment that record is com- pleted by the Assessor and the
verifies the claim by simulating the skills required Candidate. The Asses- sor will:
in a job situation, backed up by supporting process ■ Record the types of assessment used in judging the
knowledge, will provide the assessor with sufficient evidence
evidence upon which to make a judgement.
■ Record against the evidence provided, if the evi-
When conducting an assessment against a claim made, dence is Valid, Authentic, Sufficient and Current.
it is preferable that standardised Assessment Instru- ■ Be a basis for a recommendation leading to fur-
ments are used by the assessors. The use of the ther verification assessment, learning develop-
stan- dardised instruments allows for the validation of ment, or an award recommendation. Assessors
assess- ment data and instruments. Integrated will make, record and sign off the
Assessment instruments (IAI’s) contain the tools and recommendation, along with the candidate, in the
other judge- ment/assessment criteria used in Candidates Action Plan
evaluating the quality of the evidence provided. Each IAI
■ Maintain the Evidence Review Record as proof of
will assist the asses- sor in the making of judgements in
the Assessment decisions made.
an integrated manner involving the skill,
relevant/required knowledge and other components
required for a comprehensive assessment.
FROM CONCEPTS TO IMPLEMENTATION
116 A HANDBOOK FOR NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORKS DEVELOPERS
This record is proof of the judgement or assessment mend Gap training/Learning Development and will
of evidence, as recorded by the Assessor and agreed need to record the Learning Development needs in
by the candidate. the candidates Action Plan. This plan needs to be
Evaluate Outcomes agreed with the Candidate.
The Assessor will finalise judgement decisions, agree Box 18: The Assessor as a professional
this with the candidate and record this as the record
of achievement on the candidates file. If, for example As a qualified and registered Assessor, the Assessor is
there are three Learning Outcomes that the candidate expected to provide decisions that are fair and impartial,
and are agreed with the candidate. The Assessor is also
has provided sufficient evidence for, but one Learning
expected to do this in a professional manner, and in a way
Out- come where the evidence does not meet the that is open to verification or query.
require- ments, the assessor can ask the candidate to
To achieve this, the Assessor will be qualified both as
complete a Further Verification Assessment. The
an Assessor and in the Occupation that the Assessor is
outcome of this process is a recommendation by the making judgements on. The Assessor must ensure that the
assessor. decisions taken regarding the acceptance or rejection of
the sufficiency, validity, currency and authenticity of a can-
Record Recommendation didate’s evidence are recorded in the candidate’s portfolio,
or other approved RPL record.
Where sufficient evidence is provided the assessor
will make a recommendation leading to an award. Where
Figure 29 summarises the RPL assessment purpose,
the evidence does not meet the requirements for
stages and processes.
award recommendation purposes the assessor can
recom-
Portfolio/Evidence Review:
Candidate’s details
Education History
Check portfolio to confirm claims
Training History
made and validated. Review Non-formal Training and Development History
Evidence
Employment History
Match Claims
Discuss: Orientation
Learning outcomes Orientation Record Sheet
assessment criteria Orientate View and discuss model criteria and standards
competency evaluation to Discuss qualification and Standards
Standards Explain technical terms
Assessment Implementation
Implement assessment assignment
Prepare the candidate and plan for Plan & Assessment Assignment Questions and Answers
assessment. Implement (Tech)
Assessment
Use appropriate assessment methods: Assessment Evidence
Questioning Evaluate Portfolio and evidence
Observation Assessme Assessment Check Sheet and record
Product sampling. nt Evaluate assessment and record outcomes
Outcomes
Assist and support Candidate. Recommendation
Feedback to candidate Award recommendation
Results forwarded for award Record
Learning Development
Recommendati
on
17
Verifier Guidelines Verifiers to the appropriate awarding body. All
The Verifier supports the RPL process through Verification reports will contain data resulting from:-
review- ing the overall RPL process in an independent ■ Candidate feedback
manner. The Verifier underpins the credibility and ■ Advisors
relevance of the RPL process/result to the Quality
Assurance body, Awarding body, the candidates, the ■ Assessors
provider, and to the broad community. The Verifier will ■ Awards data
need to put in place the operational systems of checks ■ Instruments used
and balances that as- sure this process and its
■ Data capturing quality & integrity
outcomes. Verifiers are assisted in their functions by the
use of standardised instruments/ documents/ records. ■ Further Verification Assessment assignments
The Verifier can be an internal Veri- fier or a Verifier from ■ Learning Development progression plans
outside the RPL institution. Whether the Verifier is
■ RPL Process Observation
internal or external, they will be Qualified in line with
the Verifier Qualification or Standard and be registered The Verifier will;
with the appropriate Quality Assurance body.
■ Schedule the verification process by agreement with
The role of the Verifier is to: the RPL institution & practitioners
■ Assure the quality of the RPL process, the instru- ■ Observe the RPL process at various stages
ments used and outcomes recommended when ■ Record & log non compliances
RPL has been implemented within an enterprise
■ Resolve non-compliance issues locally
or institution providing RPL services.
■ Record and report outcomes to resolve non compli-
■ Conducted the verification in line with the QA policy
ances
on assessment.
■ Collect, analyse, organise and evaluate information.
■ Review the RPL process with candidates and the
other RPL practitioners and obtain their feedback. ■ Plan, prepare and conduct verification.
■ Record and report on the RPL process ■ Advise and support practitioners.
■ Approve or put on hold recommendations made, ■ Review verification systems and requirements.
prior to the issuing of certificates. ■ Prepare external verification requirements.
(In line with standard practice, once a certificate has ■ Report according to procedures.
been issued, it may only be withdrawn on grounds of ■ Approve or amend RPL outcome recommendations
fraud)
Provide verification
Report, record reports to awarding body for action in line with
Provide Quality assurance guidance &
& apply existing TVET QA procedures
reports re-verification results
verification
Section C: Credit Transfer, Certification, Awards, an award. There may be a need to consider what pro-
Credits, Statements of recognition cess best suits the supporting the allocation of credits to
C. 1. Credit Transfer all qualifications, NOS and Learning Outcomes/Elements
within NOS, particularly when applying RPL using option
“Credit transfer is the process of recognising prior learn- C or D. A Credit points system will allow for the accumu-
ing that has been credit rated by the assessment & lation of credits, progression to an award as detailed
cer- tification bodies to do so. The transfer of credit in Option B. Such a system will need to be
points from one qualification or learning programme incorporated into the National Assessment &
into an- other helps to minimise duplication of Certification system legislation, for future use during
learning.”(NSQF notification No. 8/6/2013-Invt). the RPL process.
RPL
Learning Formal
Non-formal, nforma
Learning
FURTHER READING
Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (Australia) (DEEWR). 2008. Development and state of the art of
adult learning and education. National report of Australia. (UNESCO’s 6 international conference on Adult Education, CONFINTEA
VI). Canberra, DEEWR.http: www.unesco.org/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/INSTITUTES/UIL/confintea/pdf/National _Reports/Asia%20
-%20Pacific/Australia.pdf. (Accessed 17 April 2015.)
Duchemin, C. 2014. Country report France. European Commission, Cedefop and ICF International, European inventory on valida-
tion of non-formal and informal learning 2014. http://libserver.cedefop.europa.eu/vetelib/2014/87058_FR.pdf
(Accessed 16 April 2015.)
European Union. 2012. Council recommendation on the validation of non-formal and informal learning. Official Journal of the Eu-
ropean Union, C 398/1. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:39 8:0001:0005:EN:PDF (Accessed
16 April 2015.)
Ganzglass, E., Bird, K. and Prince, H. 2011. Giving Credit When Credit Is Due: Creating a Competency-Based Qualifications
Framework for Post-Secondary Education and Training. Washington DC, Center for Postsecondary and Economic Success
(CLASP).
Villalba, E. 2009. Learning at the core: knowledge management as an employer strategy for lifelong learning. M. D. Lytras and
P. Ordóñez de Pablos (eds), Knowledge Ecology in Global Business: Managing Intellectual Capital. Hershey, Pa, IGI-Global, pp. 132–
56.
Villalba, E., Souto-Otero, M. and Murphy, I. 2014. The 2014 European Inventory on validation of non-formal and informal learning:
prospects and trends on validation in Europe, Berufsbildung in Wissenschaft und Praxis, Vol. 15, No. 5, pp. 16–19.
21
MODULE 12
PILOT PROJECT
IN RECOGNITION
OF PRIOR
LEARNING FOR
DOMESTIC
WORKERS
Singh, M. and Duvekot, R. 2013. Linking Recognition Practices to National Qualifications Frameworks: International Benchmark-
ing of Experiences and Strategies on the Recognition, Validation And Accreditation (RVA) of NonFormal and Informal Learning.
Hamburg, Germany, UIL and Inholland University of Applied Sciences.
UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning (UIL). 2012. UNESCO Guidelines for the Recognition, Validation and Accreditation of the
Outcomes of Non-formal and Informal Learning. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002163/216360e.pdf (Accessed 16
April 2015.)
29
FROM CONCEPTS TO IMPLEMENTATION
130 A HANDBOOK FOR NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORKS DEVELOPERS
Acronyms
31
KSC Knowledge Skill Competence
LLL Lifelong Learning
MS Member States
NARIC National Academic Recognition Information Centre
NCVT National Council for Vocational Training
NGO Non Governmental Organisation
NSDA National Skills Development Agency
NOS National Occupational Standards
NCP National Coordination Point
NQAI National Qualification Authorities of Ireland
NQF National Qualifications Framework
NQR National Qualification Register
NSDA National Skills Development Agency
NSQF National Skills Qualifications Framework
NVQ National Vocational Qualifications
NZ New Zealand
NZQA New Zealand Qualification Agency
OfQUAL Office of Qualifications and Examination Regulations
OMC Open Method of Coordination
OS Occupational Standards
PQF Pacific Qualification Framework
QA Quality Assurance
QCF Qualification and credit framework
QP Qualification Pack
QQI Quality and Qualifications of Ireland
QF Qualification Framework
RNCP Registre National des Certifications Professionnelles
RTO Registered Training Organisations
SSC Sector Skills Council
TP Training Providers
SADC South African Development Community
SAQA South African Qualification Agency
SCQF Scottish Credit Qualification Framework
TQFSSC Transnational Qualification Framework for the Small States of the Commonwealth
TVET Technical Vocational Education and Training
UGC University Grants Commission