Qualification Frameworks in EHEA
Regional seminar on Qualification Framework
10 -11 November 2011
Vera Stastna
Charles University, Prague
[email protected]
European Higher Education Area
> Bologna Process
● started at Sorbonne University (1998) and in Bologna
(1999)
● aims at more competitive and attractive higher education
system in Europe
–
–
–
–
Common principles
Harmonised architecture
Commonly defined and used instruments
Shift in paradigm (student centred learning and lifelong
learning concept)
> European Higher Education Area (EHEA)
was launched at the Budapest – Vienna
ministerial conference on 11-12 March 2010
Existing (transparency) tools in the
Bologna Process
>
>
>
>
Learning outcomes
ECTS
Quality Assurance
Qualification Frameworks
● Meta frameworks at European level – ECTS is key
element for 1st and 2nd cycle; 3rd cycle discussion
● National level qualification framework – can contain
more detailed national credit arrangements
> Diploma Supplement
> Mutually interlinked
> Lisbon Recognition Convention
STPEHEN ADAM: [email protected]
INTEGRATED
TOOLS!
Qualification
Frameworks
(FQ-EHEA -2012
deadline+ EQFLLL +
binary divide
issues)
New technology
Mission
statement/diversit
y in university
roles
Bologna process
EHEA established.
but objectives not
achieved
(Budapest-Vienna
2010)
Mobility Targets
Revenue sources –
Finance
CURRENT EUROPEAN HIGHER
EDUCATION REFORM ISSUES
+
S U R V I V A L?
Mergers
CONTEXT:
• Growth in demand
• Constrained funding
• Demographic change
• Increased competition
• Globalisation
(By 2020 20%
study/training
abroad)
Quality Assurance
(Internal +
External) +
accreditation
issues
RANKINGS ?
Curriculum
reform/developme
nt
(for profit HEI)
Recognition issues
Markets
(Diploma
Supplement +
Lisbon Recognition
Convention + RPL)
Borderless
education (TNE)
Credit Systems +
confusions
ECTS v ECVET
Internationalisation
Student- centred
learning
Employability
Learning
outcomes –
delivery
assessment
Qualification in EHEA
• The main end product of the Bologna reforms is better qualification
– based on learning outcomes;
– transparent;
– more tailor made to the needs of diversified groups students;
– better organisation of the programme; …
and not just new educational structures
• Multi-dimensional entity – it is not possible to isolate its particular
dimensions
– Level of the qualification (Bachelor, Master, doctoral)
– Profile
– Learning outcomes + Student assessment
– Workload–ECTS credits – credits are allocated to learning outcomes
(not vice-versa)
– Quality assurance
• Ballance needed
• There might be different and flexible paths to reach the qualification
„Meta-Frameworks“ at European
level (1)
> Overarching Qualification Framework for European Higher
Education Area (QF-EHEA)
● ECTS credits associated with
─ 1st cycle (usually called Bachelor): 180 – 240 ECTS; (according to national
context „short cycle“ within the 1st cycle – 120 ECTS)
─ 2nd cycle (usually called Master): 90-120 ECTS, minimum 60 ECTS gained at
Master's level
─ 3rd cycle (doctoral degree): 3-4 standard years of duration (no credit points
agreed, some countries, some HEIs use them as well)
> European qualification framework for LLL (EQF)– European
Union
– 8 levels
– No credit ranges
– Creation of NQF is recommended – Referencing to EQF (NQF or
national system)
> National level qualification framework – can contain more
detailed national credit arrangements
> High potential for recognition of prior learning; lifelong
learning concept
„Meta-Frameworks“ at European
level (2)
EQF Level
QF-EHEA Cycle
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
(„Short cycle qualification“ within the 1st cycle
120 ECTS credits)
5
1
6
180-240 ECTS credits
7
2
60 – 180 ECTS credits, usually 90-180 ECTS,
And in parallel 60 ECTS credits should
obtained at the 2nd cycle level
8
3
No credits ranges specified;
3-4 standard years (ftll-time delivery mode)
7
POTENTIAL BENEFITS (Eropean
Commission)(List from EQF Note 2: by Jens Bjornavold
(Cedefop) and Mike Coles (UK). February 2010)
1
2
3
4
5
Increased consistency of qualifications
Better transparency for individuals and employers
Increased currency of single qualifications
A broader range of learning forms are recognised
A national/external reference point for qualifications
standards
6 Clarification of learning pathways and progression
7 Increased portability of qualifications
8 Acting as a platform for stakeholders for strengthening
cooperation and commitment
9 Greater coherence of national reform policies
10 A stronger basis for international co-operation,
understanding and comparison
• Any advantages of the QF-EHEA can become
reality only if there are national frameworks
for qualifications established and the relation
between the national levels and European
levels have been clearly defined, described
and validated in a trustful, internationally
recognised way.
NQF
QF - EHEA
closest to the operational reality; it
allows for description of all
specificities within the national
system
more detailed, could obtain more
levels
owned by national system
provides the broad structure within
which national qualifications
frameworks will be developed and
allows diversity within these limits
ultimately determines what
qualifications learners will earn
ensures compatibility among
different national frameworks for
qualifications – serves as a
“translation tool”
facilitates movement between
systems
describe the qualifications within a presents a common face of
given education system and how
“Bologna/EHEA qualifications”10to
they interlink
the rest of the world
• Important tool, however only a tool. The
vision of what system we want is needed!
• Establishment of National qualification
frameworks - to basic functions
– Transparency tool describing the systém
– Instrument for change
• Curriculum reform (learning outcomes)
• Qualification structure
10 steps towards National
Qualification Frameworks
Step 1. Decision to start developing the NQF has been taken by the national body
responsible for HE and/or the minister
Step 2. The purpose(s) of the NQF have been agreed and outlined
Step 3. The process of developing the NQF has been set up, with stakeholders
identified and committee(s) established
Step 4. The level structure, level descriptors (learning outcomes), and credi ranges
have been agreed
Step 5. Consultation / national discussion has taken place and the design o the
NQF has been agreed by stakeholders
Step 6. The NQF has been adopted in legislation or in other high level policy
Step 7. Implementation of the NQF has started with agreement on the roles and
responsibilities of HE institutions, QA agency (ies) and other bodies
Step 8. Study programmes have been re-designed on the basis of the LOs included
in the NQF
Step 9. Qualifications have been included in the NQF
Step 10. The Framework has self-certified its compatibility with the European
Framework for HE
Qualification frameworks
•
•
•
National qualifications frameworks are promoted by Bologna (widely spread –
also countries outside Bologna family)
Designed to help classify, explain, show relationships and establish standards
(accountability) between different qualifications
They can do much more including:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
•
•
help modernise education;
improve recognition and mobility;
improve access and social inclusion;
help adjust to demographic change – lifelong learning perspective;
direct the development of qualifications;
improve transparency and accountability;
enhance flexibility
All countries already have implicit qualifications frameworks but they can often
be chaotic, unsystematic and confusing – MORE OVER the systems have been
changing, offering more possibilities, however they become more complicated
and less understandable for users
Countries should not lose sight of what they want their NQF to achieve and that
this is reflected in their design
– Just a transparency tool
– Means of reform initiatives - carefully consider their value added
Bologna Process – Stocktaking 2012
Green
10 countries
Light
green
11 countries
Yellow
17 countries
Orange
2 countries
Red
3 countries
Step 10. The Framework has self-certified its compatibility with the European
Framework for HE
Steps 7-9.
9. Qualifications have been included in the NQF,
8. Study programmes have been re-designed on the basis of the LOs included
in the NQF,
7. Implementation of the NQF has started with agreement on the roles and
responsibilities of HE institutions, QA agency (ies) and other bodies
Steps 5-6.
6. The NQF has been adopted in legislation or in other high level policy
5. Consultation / national discussion has taken place and the design of
the NQF has been agreed by stakeholders
Step 4. The level structure, level descriptors (learning outcomes),
and credit ranges have been agreed,
Step 3. The process of developing the NQF has been set up, with
stakeholders identified and committee(s) established
Step 2. The purpose(s) of the NQF have been agreed and outlined
Step 1. Decision to start developing the NQF has been taken by the
national body responsible for HE and/or the minister
Some thoughts at the end
> Main end product of the Bologna reforms are better qualifications
based on learning outcomes and certainly not just new educational
structures (ECTS, QF, etc.);
> One of the main goals of Bologna Process is free movement;
necessary (pre)condition is fair and smooth recognition!
> Existing tools Learning outcomes, ECTS, Quality Assurance,
Qualification Frameworks, Diploma Supplement are mutually
interlinked; have to be implemented in one system;
> Not to interchange goals and tools!
> Bottom-up reform (academics are responsible for creating and
maintaining qualifications) requiring fundamental changes of
attitude at the institutional level;
> Stakeholder involvement (incl. students and employers)- necessary
for better qualifications as well as for recognition outside academia
> Implementation needs UNDERSTANDING, COMMITMENT and
TIME.
Here we are now
And this is hopefully the future
Thank you for your attention!