credits assignment - the jury and the evaluation modalities

Credits assignmentThe French Model

The jury and the evaluation modalities

01/05/2023 www.valeru.eu 2

or

VNIL : a reminder of the procedure

Information : regular meetings (about 1 per month)

Receipt of the first documents : Curriculum vitae, cover letter, evidences (diplomas, labour contracts, employer attestations…)

First meeting with the counsellor : feasibility and legibility

Guidance to complete the portfolio

Deposing the portfolio

JURY - Assessment

Contract

RegistrationDiploma

Training

VNIL counsellors Information assistants

Administrative assistants

VNIL counsellors Teacher responsible of the degree

VNIL counsellors

Administrative assistants


The jury : composition

According to the decree n°2002-590 of 26 April 2002 :

The validation committee (or jury) comprises a majority of faculty members (professor-researcher) and professionals who are competent to assess the nature of experience for which the validation is requested.

The University Administration Committee sets the rules of the VNIL of its institution, the composition of juries, and detailed rules to different types of diplomas (e.g. : procedure for Ph.D degrees)


The jury : composition

Permanents• Chairman :

• Chancellor of the University• Vice-rector• Dean of the faculty

• Permanent members :• Head of faculty• Head of LLL Department• Manager or counsellor VNIL

Experts

• 2 professors-researchers (one responsible for the degree referred)

• 1 person who is not from the university : « a professional » or « practitioner »


The jury : its role

According to the decree n°2002-590 of 26 April 2002 :

The jury reviews the candidate’s portfolio and meet with him to discuss it.

The jury determines the knowledge and skills that it deems can be validated, and can decide to grant the full degree.


The jury’s members : their rolesThe chairman :

Guarantor of the proper conduct of the jury in accordance with the law and the rules ;Animates the 4 times of the jury : consultation, interview of the candidate, deliberation, decision.

The professors-researchers :Experts of the degree, they have the pedagogical content knowledge ; Guarantors of knowledge acquisition terms and skills covered by the diploma.

The practitioners : They bring their sensitivity in the workplace and their knowledge of professional situations (technical know-how, workplace...) ;they will be able to appreciate the "professionalism" of the candidate


The jury : concretely, how it goes ?

The interview of the candidate :Duration : about 45 minutesIncluding : presentation of the candidate in 10 minutes maximum :

His careerHis personal and/or professional projectThe interest of the diploma compared to the projectExpectations with respect to the validation

The jury asks questions


The jury of validation

Examine the equivalence between the reported experiences (and knowledge explained, formalized) and the set of skills standards that determine the achievement of the targeted certification.


The evaluation modalities of the VNIL

The evaluation can’t be an academic assessment in the strict sense

It is to decide if the candidate has a level of knowledge and skills comparable to a student who would come to achieve the same degree.

It will never be possible to overlap the two profiles exactly in that learning outcomes were developed from very different approaches.


The principles of the evaluation

Validate learning outcomes, not the jobs held. Behind a same position designation can hide different realities: the jury is thus committed to the facts and not the labels of employment. In the interest of educational equity, value judgments will be removed.

Consider the candidate's approach to a dynamic of professionalization. The candidate is evaluated at a time of his professional career.

Go beyond a study of the portfolio “teaching unit per teaching unit" to a comprehensive approach of the candidate as a whole (basic and transversal learning outcomes).


Tools for evaluation The portfolio analysis will focus on :

consistency in the construction of the file the choice of jobs / activities highlighted the experience analysis argumentation toward the degree the choice of illustrations and proofs the academic level of the document presented (expression, syntax, spelling,

analytical skills, synthesis,...)

The interview of the candidate : complete the information after reading and analysis of the file allows an understanding of the actual activities of the candidate capture the most significant elements in relation to the degree requirement verify that the candidate is able to adapt his skills to different contexts

Medias : file from the National Directory of Professional Certification the curriculum of the degree


Questions from the jury

Are the candidate’s jobs corresponding to the level of degree requirement asked?Are the activities described corresponding to those of the jobs held by graduates?Are the deficiencies identified, if any, offset by other elements?What are the self-studies courses and continuing education of the candidate?Are the presentation and answers of the candidate consistent with the level of proficiency highlighted in the writing?


The decision : principles

taking into account the candidate's career in its entirety

principle of respecting and listening the other members of the jury

the joint commitment on the decision of the jury


The jury : 3 possible decisions

Grant the full degree : the candidate's experience is consistent with degree requirements. He then obtained the full diploma and referred mention should be awarded. The jury awards the ECTS (60 per year. Thus, 120 ects for a master's degree). This degree does not mention on validation, it has exactly the same value as a degree obtained by other certification pathways.

Award only part of the degree : the jury finds that the candidate has some of the knowledge and skills expected and therefore attributed a part of the degree. It issues recommendations for graduation. The jury awards a number of ECTS (e.g.: 90/120 for a Master’s degree) corresponding to the percentage of validation granted.

Don’t validate anything : the jury finds that the level of skills and knowledge of the candidate is not in line with the expected level. It therefore opposes a refusal to demand and no validation is granted. This result is very unusual at this stage.


EXAMPLE


EXAMPLE : the profile of the candidate

Candidate : Marie DUPONTAge : 41 years oldLives in Rennes (250 km from Brest)Job : human resources manager for 14 yearsDiploma : bachelor in public administrationContinuing education : courses every years about laws, Human Resource Planning (HRP), management of projects, finance, software…Her project : career development, aims to have a degree as the same level as her professional experience


EXAMPLE : her claim, our answer

Marie wants to validate the master’s degree in human resources management proposed by UBO in it’s Institute of Business Administration.She has 14 years of experience ; thus, she is admissibleThe professor-researcher responsible of the diploma think that a VNIL is possible in relation to the long career of the candidate. Daniel, who is counselor in VNIL, advises Marie in the writing of the portfolio. Marie has to explain all her tasks in relation with the diploma using the first person singular, “I”. It will last 6 months ; the portfolio contains 90 pages excluding annexes.


EXAMPLE : extract of a real portfolio

Section on Marie’s way to manage a budget

“Each end of the year, I have to submit to the exercise of calculating the budget Human Resources of

the future exercise. First of all, our client provides us the estimated revenue. This estimate allows the

Industrial Director calculate my company sales and production load. I then worked with the

Production Manager to identify additional staffing requirements for the realization of the forecast

production load. Given these requirements, wage increases negotiated in mandatory annual

negotiations and all other known changes, I realize the Human Resources budget of the following

year. For the realization of the budget, I create, in an Excel file, a monthly database of individual

salaries. I set up the indexing tabs on collecting all variable data, which allows to quickly perform

multiple design assumptions. I then discussed with the Director General and the head of accounting

before justifying the meeting with the group's leaders. Over the years, I have improved my budget

development process and refined the quality of forecasts. The budget is broken down by month; I

have built by example seasonality in the calculation of payroll and decision paid leave”.


EXAMPLE : the preparation of the jury

The members of the jury :Chairman : the dean of the Institute of Business ManagementProfessor-researcher 1 : the responsible of the Master’s degree in human resources managementProfessor-researcher 2 : expert in HRP and financePractitioner : self-employed consultant in management and advisor in business strategy.A counselor in VNIL is present but not as a member of the jury

the portfolio was sent to the jury members one month before the interview. So they had time to read it.


EXAMPLE : the day of the interview with the jury

Consultation between the members of the jury before the interview:

It’s a good written report, Marie’s knowledge and skills are undeniable.

Interview : Marie presents her career and her project for 10 minutesThe members of the jury ask her questions :

Are there other methods than those you used?Could you be competent in another company than your own, a largest one for example?…

DeliberationThe board members discuss ten minutes to agree on a collective decision….

Decision


EXAMPLE : the decision of the jury

The knowledge and skills of Marie cover most of the teachings of the diploma. Her career is awesome ! and her skills proved…

However, her portfolio and the interview showed that she doesn’t control very well the quality approach methodology, and never had to deal with ERP software that can be encountered in larger companies.

The jury recommends :Writing a thesis on quality management (8 ects)The monitoring and evaluation of teaching unit related to information systems (3 ects – 36h)Follow the Business English course because she might need this language later (2 ects – 24h)

The jury assigns to Marie 107 ECTS / 120.

She has five years to complete the recommendation of the jury. Marie must obtain a score above the average for each assessment requested by the jury.

Thank you for your

attention !

22

credits assignment - the jury and the evaluation modalities

Education