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 Global revue of the use of level descriptors 8
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;
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 Address informal employment Develop private public Facilitating partnerships recognition Support skills beyond formal systems Stakeholder development cooperation at all levels QA NQFs influencing standards, curricula, assessment criteria based on learning outcomes OPENN ESS to all forms of learning Adapt formal E&T systems Develop learning outcomes Amend standards, curricula & assessment criteria RECOGNIT ION of nonformal & informal learning QUALITY CERTIFICATI ONS based on the same quality as for qualification s from formal systems
Applicatio n of knowledg e, skills and competen ces Regional Qualifications Framework RECOGNISING LEARNING SADC ASEAN EQF Caribbean TQF 15 member states 10 member states 27 member states 15 member states 29 member states No specification for credit transfer No specification for credit transfer ECVET Credit system envisaged Clearing House
Applicatio n of knowledg e, skills and competen ces Regional Qualifications Framework RECOGNISING LEARNING GQF PQR ECOWAS Central American Qualifications Framework 6 member states 15 member states 15 member states 6 member states Draft No specification for credit transfer Registar Draft No specification for credit transfer Tertiary Education Credit system envisaged
Regional conventions on Higher Education Arusha (Addis) Recognition Convention Asia-Pacific Regional Convention Lisbon Recognition Convention Latin America and the Caribbean Regional Convention Global standardsetting instrument on the recognition of higher education qualifications 22 member states 21 member states 53 member states Regional survey underway 37 th General Conference Revised end-2014 2013 process to encourage ratification Guidelines being developed Involvement of NARIC network A regional meeting planned in Brazil in October 2015 To build upon regional conventions
The level of learnin g Other recognition technologies SETTING LEVELS OF LEARNING 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
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 Research Scope 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
Overview of the conceptual framework and key findings Learning in a lifelong learning context Qualifications and qualifications frameworks The level of learning CATEGORISING LEARNING Domains of learning RECOGNISING LEARNING Application of knowledge, skills and competences Assessment of learning outcomes SETTING LEVELS OF LEARNING
Domai ns of learnin g Findings related to the domains of learning CATEGORISING 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.
Finding related to Levelling through level descriptors 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 Assessment of learning outcomes Convergence on the recognition of the importance of assessment of learning outcomes, Convergence on promoting the equal value of learning outcomes of formal, nonformal 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
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? Government and international agencies response to address RQ and common good of education Qualifications New developments based on market demands... unregulated and often lacking transparency International qualifications Qualifications Frameworks I, II and III Transnational QFs Referencing Representation
Overall Process of Development of World Reference Levels Review Political Process WRLs Conceptua -lisation Consultation 33
Three-Tier Approach WRLs - Review - Conceptualization - Consultation - Political Connecting RQFs Advocacy - Community of practices - Cooperation and joint initiatives - Supporting capacity building - Mobilization - Communicating and promoting - Collective actions Putting the Shanghai Recommendation at work
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?