international skills and qualifications landscape · 3. internationalisation of education and...
TRANSCRIPT
International Skills and Qualifications
Landscape
Borhene Chakroun
8 October2015
Presentation structure
1. Background
2. Global Study on the use of level descriptors
3. Implications for WRLs
4. Future Developments
Third International Congress Recommendation to UNESCO Director-General
Facilitate the international comparison and recognition of TVET qualifications
By
Developing international guidelines on quality assurance for the recognition of qualifications,
based on learning outcomes,
And
Identifying a set of world reference levels of learning outcomes
Filling the gap and supporting “mobilities”
1. Mobility of people: 240 million economic migrants and growing Skills and talent gaps across the globe
2. Mobility of jobs: Training and qualifications programmes based on national models and architecture not international requirements
3. Internationalisation of education and training: Cross-boarder education and training, growing use of sectors recognised awards rather than national qualifications, on-line certifications, etc.
4. Progression in LLL: Qualifications are not recognised across national boundaries
Main challenges
1. How to enhance mutual trust in qualifications across countries?
2. How to ensure that Knowldge, Skills and Competences are documented in a commonly accepted and understanble form?
3. How to convey pertinent information to employers, education and training providers, other actors across the borders?
4. How to facilitate the mobility of certified competent individuals? And What a competent individual/worker actually mean in specific context?
Global Study
World Reference Levels of Learning Outcomes – the use of level
descriptors in the 21st century
International landscape
Global Inventory on National AND REGIONAL Qualifications
Frameworks
8
Global revue of the use of level descriptors
CAPTURING A GLOBAL TREND
• The second edition of the QF inventory shows progress since 2013:
• 80% of UN member states are now developing or implementing NQFs
• The number of QFs is not growing fast, but in some countries developments are deepening.
• The focus of the research is global, addressing high, medium & low income countries
• 508 pages report including 6 thematic chapters, 84 individual country descriptions and 7 regional QFs
• A collaborative effort of Unesco, Cedefop, ETF & Unesco Institute for Lifelong learning
LIST OF 154 COUNTRIES OR TERRITORIES PLANNING, DEVELOPING OR IMPLEMENTING QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORKS
Albania; Angola; Andorra; Antigua & Barbuda; Argentina; Armenia; Australia; Austria; Azerbaijan; Bahrain; Bangladesh; Barbados; Brazil; Belarus; Belgium; Benin; Belize; Bhutan; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Botswana; Brazil; Brunei Darussalam; Bulgaria; Burkina Faso; Burundi, Cabo Verde; Cambodia; Canada; Chile; Colombia; Costa Rica; Côte d’Ivoire; Croatia; Cyprus (and Northern Part of Cyprus); Czech Republic; Denmark; Dominica; Egypt; El Salvador; Eritrea; Estonia; Ethiopia; Finland; France; Georgia; Germany; Ghana; Greece; Grenada; Guinée; Guinée Bissau; Guyana; Haiti; Hong Kong; Hungary; Honduras; Iceland; India; Indonesia; Ireland; Israel; Italy; Jamaica; Jordan; Kazakhstan; Kenya; Kiribati; Korea; Kosovo; Kuwait; Kyrgyzstan; Lao People’s Democratic Republic; Latvia; Lebanon; Lesotho; Liechtenstein; Liberia; Lithuania; Luxembourg; Madagascar; Malawi; Malaysia; Maldives; Mali; Malta; Mauritius; Mexico; Montenegro; Montserrat; Palestine; Morocco; Mozambique; Myanmar; Namibia; Netherlands; Nepal; New Zealand; Nicaragua; Niger; Nigeria; Norway; Oman; Pakistan; Palestine; Panama; Papua New Guinea; Philippines; Paraguay; Poland; Portugal; Republic of Moldova; Romania; Russian Federation; Rwanda; Saint Lucia; Samoa; Serbia; Senegal; Seychelles; Sierra Leone; Singapore; Slovak Republic; Slovenia; Somalia (Somaliland); South Africa; Spain; St. Kitts & Nevis; St. Lucia; St. Vincent and the Grenadines; Suriname; Swaziland; Sweden; Switzerland; Tajikistan; Thailand; The Bahamas; The Comoros; the Democratic Republic of Congo; The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia; The Gambia; The Holy See, Timor-Leste; Togolese Republic; Tonga; Trinidad & Tobago; Tunisia; Turkey; Tuvalu and Vanuatu; Ukraine; United Arab Emirates; United Kingdom; United Republic of Tanzania; Uruguay; Viet Nam; Zambia; Zimbabwe.
THEMATIC CHAPTERS FINDINGS 1
• Learning outcomes are central to implementation of qualification frameworks.
• As national qualifications frameworks become operational, their impact on education, training and employment policies and institutions increases
• Regional qualifications frameworks, as exemplified by the EQF, can play a key role in inspiring QF developments and promoting international cooperation.
• NQFs help to identify strengths and weaknesses of existing qualifications systems and point to the need for new qualifications.
• The implementation of NQFs inspire and trigger
• new legislation, for example linked to lifelong learning
• new institutional solution, for example in quality assurance
• new forms of stakeholder involvement, for example by involving the labour market in qualifications design and review
• Qualifications frameworks facilitate international cooperation, illustrated by the regional qualifications frameworks and the UNESCO initiative on World Reference Levels
LEARNING FROM DIFFERENT CONTEXTS
Use of NQFs in Asia and Europe
Facilitating recognition beyond formal systems
Address informal employment
Develop private public partnerships
Support skills development
Adapt formal E&T systems
Develop learning outcomes
Amend standards, curricula & assessment criteria
NQFs influencing • standards, • curricula, • assessment
criteria based on learning outcomes
RECOGNITION of non-formal & informal learning
OPENNESS to all forms of learning
QUALITY CERTIFICATIONS based on the same quality as for qualifications from formal systems
Stakeholder
cooperation
at all levels
QA
RECOGNISING LEARNING
Application of knowledge, skills and competences
SADC
15 member states
No specification
for credit transfer
ASEAN
10 member states
No specification
for credit transfer
EQF
27 member states
ECVET
Caribbean
15 member states
Credit system envisaged
TQF
29 member states
Clearing
House
Regional Qualifications Framework
RECOGNISING LEARNING
Application of knowledge, skills and competences
GQF
6 member states
Draft
No specification
for credit transfer
PQR
15 member states
Registar
ECOWAS
15 member states
Draft
No specification
for credit transfer
Central American Qualifications
Framework
6 member states
Tertiary Education
Credit system envisaged
Regional Qualifications Framework
Arusha (Addis)
Recognition Convention
22 member states
Revised end-2014
Asia-Pacific Regional
Convention
21 member states
2013 process to encourage ratification
Guidelines being
developed
Lisbon Recognition Convention
53 member states
Involvement of NARIC network
Latin America and the
Caribbean Regional
Convention
Regional survey
underway
A regional meeting
planned in Brazil in
October 2015
Global standard-setting
instrument on the recognition
of higher education
qualifications
37th General Conference
To build upon regional
conventions
Regional conventions on Higher Education
Professional and occupational standards
•Learning outcomes are widely used
•Domains coupled with levels of proficiency
•Examples include the INSSO, Tuning, DISCO
Learning metrics
•Empirical notion of level is used
•Highly contextusalised categories
•Examples include LMTF, STEP, PIAAC, LAMP, WorldSkills
Occupational classification systems
• Increasingly being used on qualifications frameworks
•Highly developed and differentiated levelling schemes
•Examples include ISCO-08, O*NET, ESCO
Educational classification systems
•General expectations and “graduateness”
•Level is linked to sets of education programmes
•Examples include ISCED, SBS
Other recognition technologies
SETTING LEVELS OF LEARNING
The level of learning
On-line Certifications
• Test-based credentials: Market-based.
• Online Badges:
• Online Certificates:
Key findings
Research questions
Central research question :
What are the convergences and divergences across level descriptors used in different types of qualifications frameworks, and other contexts, such as in international surveys?
QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORKS Africa: South Africa; Central and South America: Chile and Costa Rica; Europe: Poland, Germany and Scotland; Asia: Indonesia, Malaysia and South Korea; Arab States: United Arab Emirates; Australasia: Australia. All existing regional qualifications frameworks were also included: SADC RQF; CARICOM TVET QF; ASEAN RQF; EQF; QF-EHEA; and PQR.
OTHER CONTEXTS
Research Scope
Overview of the conceptual framework and key findings
CATEGORISING LEARNING
Learning in a lifelong learning context
Domains of learning
RECOGNISING LEARNING
Qualifications and qualifications frameworks
Application of knowledge, skills and competences
Assessment of learning outcomes
SETTING LEVELS OF LEARNING
The level of learning
CATEGORISING LEARNING
Domains of learning
Findings related to the domains of learning
• Despite the fact that many regional qualifications
frameworks are still at earlier stages of
development, the KSC domains are widely used;
• A hierarchical classification of levels, described by
the level descriptors, in most instances ranging
between six and ten levels.
• Convergence in the use of domains
• Lack of explicit description of
progression
• Independence between the provision
of education and training, and
qualifications development
• Lack of an explicit conceptual
framework
Finding related to Levelling through
level descriptors
• Convergence on the recognition of the
importance of assessment of learning
outcomes,
• Convergence on promoting the equal
value of learning outcomes of formal, non-
formal and informal learning,
• Large-scale international assessments on
skills development (PIAAC, STEP, etc.),
• Work-based learning is becoming more
central to skills development and
assessment of learning outcomes
Finding related to Assessment of
learning outcomes
Implications for the WRLs
Definition and purpose of WRLs
• Definition: A set of hierarchical statements, using
learning outcomes, that describe levels of learning achievements across different types of learning sufficiently generalised to be applied internationally.
• Purpose: A set of world reference levels, with the clear purpose to describe levels of learning achievements across different types of learning on a global level in order to promote the recognition of learning in a context where both people and jobs have become, and will continue to be, increasingly mobile
The development of World Reference Levels: 4 Scenarios
• Reference point –contribute by providing a common
language and approach to the use of learning outcomes through peer learning and international comparative work.
• Transparency tool –make learning and the recognition of learning more transparent across countries and regions.
• Facilitate recognition – ultimately, the world reference levels could impact directly on the recognition of qualifications and learning on a global level.
• Normative – here the world reference levels become a “global standard” against which countries and regions benchmark their systems.
Thank you
What WRLs can offer?
• Common language and approach to the use of learning outcomes across-boarder and in lifelong learning perspective
• An internationally shared hierarchy of level descriptors that allows comparisons of any kind of learning
• Act as common metric
• Strengthen Recognition methodologies by developing and providing international guidelines and resources
• Support representation
• Has international legitimacy and credibility
30
Who will use them and for what?
• Organizations: For Comparing Learning Outcomes/For Referencing?
• Individuals: For Representation?
• Market: Use internationally recognized metric?
31
WRLs: A matter of being proactive, or catching up?
Adopting Top Down or Bottom-up Approach? Offering
more than what NQFs/RQFs are offering?
Qualifications Frameworks I, II
and III Transnational
QFs
Qualifications
Referencing
Representation
International qualifications
New developments
based on market demands...
unregulated and often lacking transparency
Government and
international agencies
response to address RQ and “common good”
of education
33
WRLs
Review
Conceptua-lisation
Consultation
Political Process
Overall Process of Development of World Reference Levels
Three-Tier Approach
- Community of practices
- Cooperation and joint initiatives
- Supporting capacity building
Connecting RQFs
- Review
- Conceptualization
- Consultation
- Political
WRLs
Putting the Shanghai
Recommendation at work
- Mobilization
- Communicating and promoting
- Collective actions
Advocacy
MAIN CONCLUSIONS
1. Reference document to guide global monitoring, policy development and peer learning
2. QFs tools to link Education &Training systems but can go beyond formal education
3. Can G20 gain from working together on NQF; RQF and RPL? Is there added value in working together, rather each working on their own on their own?