Developing and Implementing a Qualifications Framework: in Hungary

1. Developing and Implementing a Qualifications Framework:in Hungary Sarajevo, 23 May

2. Is There a Recipe? No, but there are principles and good practice.

3. Basics • Qualifications are national according to national legislation • Qualifications are articulated/located in national qualifications frameworks • Vision: national frameworks are linked together through an alignment to a European meta-framework

4. A Working Definition „…the single description at national level…which is internationally understood and through which all qualifications and other learning achievements may be described and related to each other in a coherent way and which defines the relationship between qualifications.”

5. Why ‘new style’ national frameworks? • Purposes and aims of qualifications • Points of integration and overlap between different qualifications • A nationally agreed framework that reflects the agreement of stakeholders How they can act as drivers of change • Promote the attainment of qualification • Raise national and international awareness • Facilitate and support learners • Improve access and social inclusion • Influence the reform ofqualifications

6. The Hungarian Situation • Continental traditions • Several subsystems (not frameworks) co-exist • Facing a lot of new challenges • Advantages: an opportunity to review qualifications and the qualification system • An evolving framework for higher education (effects of the Bologna Process) • Public education: lessons from international assessments (PISA) • Vocational education: new competence requirements – needs of the labour market • No single agency as yet

7. How do we start? • there should be some institutional base • a paper consultation process (similarly to EQF) • discussion documents disseminated to all stakeholders (learners, education providers, government agencies, employers, business sector, trade unions, community groups, professional organizations) • an international process – a study of what is available in the diversity of QFs and involvement of experts

8. Aims • Provide information for end users (employers, parents, institutions, potential students) on the conditions for obtaining an award and the actual content of a qualification; • Support international comparability of standards with special regard to EU accession and the EHEA; • Assist student choice by informing students about possible routes of progression also within the context of LLL; • Give guidance to the higher education institutions in defining their own academic standards and the external evaluation bodies (e.g. Accreditation Board) in defining points of reference for conducting external evaluation.

9. Methodology • a clear understanding of the methodological foundation )levels, descriptors, etc.) • a shift from standardized content, organization and delivery of qualifications • In terms of components it will include levels and outcome focused indicators (credits) • The use of learning outcomes in describing units, modules and whole qualifications assists transparency, recognition and mobility • Traditional models give way to systems based on explicit reference points using learning outcomes and competencies, levels, level indicators, subject benchmarks, qualification descriptors • The use of a common language and approach - consistency will improve transparency • Even if we think of one particular sector to start with, it is important to promote multiple pathways into and through that sector – LLL • Credits expressed in learning outcomes, levels and workload give coherence and clarity to the system • QFs should be linked to standards, national and institutional quality assurance systems • There should be public understanding of the achievements represented by different qualifications to achieve public confidence in standards.

10. Learning outcomes as a key element of qualifications frameworks Definition: “ a statement of what a learner is expected to know, understand and/or able to demonstrate at the end of a period of learning.”

11. Learning Outcomes • the purpose is to be more precise and to consider what learners acquire in terms of knowledge and/or skills when they successfully complete a unit/module, etc. • focus on the learners achievement – not the teacher’s intention – many forms – broad and narrow • there are different categories of outcomes: subject specific: relate to the given field/subject/discipline and the knowledge and/or skills associated with them. • Generic outcomes e.g. transferable skills) • The concept of LOs implies that it is less important how the qualification was achieved – relevant to the recognition of prior learning, which is enhanced by the use of LOs. • QFs that employ output focused tools, particularly learning outcomes facilitate the recognition of LLL. -        

12. Main Features • The cycles to be defined are: Bachelor, Master and Doctoral Studies, though short cycles degrees are also taken into account. • The framework defines learning outcomes to be attached to each cycle, type of qualification and programme, clearly indicating the differences between each level. • A three stage process: • Stage 1: Different qualification levels are defined. Generic descriptors are applied (on the basis of the Dublin descriptors) for each level. The descriptors are of three types: • The first section contains the learning outcomes of the educational process that students who wish to hold the degree will have to achieve Those are mainly for institutions and bodies planning, conducting and evaluating degree programmes • The second section is a set of descriptors of how one can apply the acquired knowledge and understanding in certain situations. • The third section describes more general competencies that can be expected of a typical student at the given level. This information is most important for employers.

13. Co-operation Mechanisms and Trust-building • A national mechanism for developing and approving a framework • The location of a qualification within a national framework should be verified through the Quality Assurance mechanism • National frameworks should articulate in a transparent way with EQF • The relationship between the national and the European framework is verified through a self-certification process, as a national responsibility

14. The Framework for Qualifications ofthe European Higher Education Area

15. The Bergen Communiqué We adopt the overarching framework for qualifications in the EHEA, comprising of three cycles (…), generic descriptors for each cycle based on learning outcomes and competences, and credit ranges in the first and second cycle. We commit ourselves to elaborate national frameworks for qualifications compatible … by 2010, and to having started work on this by 2007

16. Why an Overarching Framework (Meta-framework) • International transparency • International recognition of qualifications • International mobility of learners and graduates

17. Main Features • Cycles • Descriptors of qualifications and learning outcomes • Credit ranges in ECTS

18. Cycles Three principle cycles: • First cycle (bachelor, licencié etc.) • Second cycle (master etc.) • Third cycle ( Ph.D. etc.) • Short cycle – „intermediate” qualification after Bergen

19. Descriptors of qualifications andlearning outcomes Dublin descriptors (generic) • Knowledge and understanding • applying knowledge and understanding • making judgements • communication skills • learning skills Not subject specific

20. Credit Ranges in ECTS • First cycle: 180-240 ECTS • Second cycle: 90-120 ECTS • Third cycle : not specified

21. Alignment of NQF to the EHEA Framework • No external control but trust building • Minimum criteria for the verification that • NQFs are compatible with the EHEA framework • Procedures for self-certification of compatibility • Role of Quality Assurance

22. Transparency Instruments Diploma Supplement • DS will be able to locate qualifications against precise national and European frameworks • The national framework shall be referenced • in all DS • The completion of the self-certification process shall be noted on DS issued subsequently