1 / 26

Communications and reforming models of National Qualifications Frameworks: Scotland and Ireland

Communications and reforming models of National Qualifications Frameworks: Scotland and Ireland. David Raffe University of Edinburgh Seminar on Qualifications Frameworks, National Council on Education, Santiago, 15 October 2013. Overview.

cutler
Download Presentation

Communications and reforming models of National Qualifications Frameworks: Scotland and Ireland

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Communications and reforming models of National Qualifications Frameworks: Scotland and Ireland David Raffe University of Edinburgh Seminar on Qualifications Frameworks, National Council on Education, Santiago, 15 October 2013

  2. Overview • A conceptual framework: National Qualifications Frameworks (NQFs) and how they differ • The Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF): a communications framework • The Irish National Framework of Qualifications (NFQ): a reforming framework • Some concluding comments

  3. 1. A conceptual framework: National Qualifications Frameworks and how they differ

  4. What is a Qualifications Framework?

  5. How NQFs differ • National context – size of country, policy culture, expertise, education system, labour market, concept of qualification • Scope – sector v comprehensive; over-arching framework v sub-frameworks • Design – number of levels, descriptors, fields, credit, tight v loose, role of learning outcomes • Leadership and control – roles of stakeholders, regulatory v voluntary, ‘top-down’ v ‘bottom-up’ • Purposes and how NQFs try to achieve them …

  6. Possible purposes of NQFs

  7. Possible change processes: how NQFs may try to achieve their purposes Choice may depend upon • National context: governance, culture, etc • Time scale

  8. Three types of NQF • Communications framework: starts from existing system, describes it, aims to make it more ‘transparent’ and support rationalisation and coherence; a tool for change rather than a driver of change • Reforming framework: starts from existing system, aims to make it more transparent but also to achieve specific reforms, e.g. fill gaps, improve quality, update standards • Transformational framework: starts from desired future system, aims for radical change, driver of change as well as tool for change

  9. … or a continuum of NQFs … but … • An NQF may vary across its ‘sub-frameworks’ and between sub-frameworks and over-arching framework • An NQF may change over time

  10. 2. The Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF): a communications framework

  11. Scotland: the national context • Separate system within UK • Small country, uniform institutions • Policy-making culture • Earlier reforms developed ‘sub-frameworks’ • Higher education degrees • Schools and colleges qualifications (Scottish Qualifications Authority) • Competence-based occupational qualifications (SVQs) … which established much of architecture of future framework • Pressures for more unified system • Choice of ‘communications’ NQF

  12. A communications NQF : describing the existing system

  13. Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) • Design: comprehensive, links sub-frameworks; ‘loose’; 12 levels; level descriptors for 5 ‘characteristics’ of outcomes; credit • Purposes: to make system easier to understand; to promote access and progression • Change processes: common language, unitisation, engaging stakeholders

  14. SCQF: Implementation • Formal launch 2001, implementation from 2003 • Voluntary framework, led by ‘owners’ of qualifications sub-frameworks (including universities) and quality body • Other organisations can also become ‘credit-rating bodies’ and admit qualifications to the framework • Implementation slow – especially non-mainstream qualifications • Partnership strengthened in 2007 • But framework has retained stakeholder support

  15. SCQF: Uses • Uses include: • Programme development, planning and managing educational provision • Coordinating provision across institutions and sectors • Supporting access, progression and credit transfer • Recognition of prior learning • Guidance • Human resource management • Slow to realise potential uses – still greater than actual uses • A ‘useful tool’ – whose use depends upon other drivers

  16. SCQF: Impacts and issues • Broadly successful but • Aims were modest • Built on (more radical) earlier reforms • Much of impact achieved by becoming ‘national language’ – promotes coherence • More impact in education than in labour market • Barriers to a unified framework: • Different types of learning • Institutional barriers • Political barriers • Needs to be part of a broader policy strategy

  17. 3. The Irish National Framework of Qualifications (NFQ): a reforming framework

  18. Ireland • Small country, uniform institutions • Policy community • Emerging ‘sub-frameworks’ for: • Universities • Non-university higher education • General education (schools) • Further education and training • Pressures for more coherent system • Pressures for reform within sectors … • European influence – especially HE • Choice of ‘reforming’ framework

  19. A reforming NQF: describing the existing system and driving specific reforms • Design: comprehensive; loose; 10 levels; descriptors for knowledge, skills, competence; award types; guidelines for quality assurance and for access transfer and progression; regulatory within 2 sectors • Purposes: broader than Scotland: (also) raising standards, enhancing quality, changing culture • Change processes: broader than Scotland: (also) regulation, quality assurance, cultural change

  20. NFQ: Implementation • Formal launch 2003 • Built on earlier and continuing reforms • Initially led by single Authority & separate awards councils for each sub-framework • Merged into single body in 2012 – now more emphasis on integration across sub-frameworks? • Stakeholder engagement

  21. NFQ: Issues • Reasonably successful – given more ambitious aims and different starting point than Scotland – but • Implementation and impact slow … • … and variable across sectors; less in general education • Competing philosophies of NQF and educational selection • Slow to integrate sub-frameworks • Concerns that many changes have been superficial • ‘Anomalies’ in placing existing qualifications • Impact needs strong ‘drivers’ (funding, public recruitment) • More impact in education than labour market

  22. 4. Concluding comments

  23. General model of change erience)

  24. Possible Issues for Chile

  25. Thank you for your attention David.Raffe@ed.ac.uk Some references CES Briefings. http://www.ces.ed.ac.uk/publications/briefings.htm Collins, T., Kelly, F., Murdoch, H., Raffe, D. and Murphy, A. (2009) Framework Implementation and Impact Study: Report of Study Team. Dublin: National Qualifications Authority of Ireland. European Training Foundation, CEDEFOP and UNESCO (2013) Global NQF Inventory https://lnconnections02.etf.europa.eu/activities/service/html/mainpage#activitypage,FFFG22d8f11eac53429991307645a2765038. Howieson, C. and Raffe, D. (2013) The paradox of Scotland: limited credit transfer in a credit-based lifelong learning system. Oxford Review of Education. DOI: 10.1080/03054985.2013.806250. International Labour Organisation. ILO research programme on implementation and impact of NQFs. http://www.ilo.org/skills/projects/WCMS_126588/lang--en/index.htm Raffe, D. (2011) Are ‘communications frameworks’ more successful? Policy learning from the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework. Journal of Education and Work, 24, 3-4, 283-302. Raffe, D. (2011) The role of learning outcomes in National Qualifications Frameworks, in Bohlinger, S. and Münchhausen, G. (eds) Validierung von Lernergebnissen: Recognition and Validation of Prior Learning. Bielefeld: Bertelsmann. Raffe, D. (2013) What is the evidence for the impact of National Qualifications Frameworks? Comparative Education,49, 2, 143-162.

More Related