1 / 46

Ponència A

Ponència A. La Qualitat a l’ensenyament dins Europa Una visió dels diferents sistemes de gestió de centres educatius de Dinamarca, Andalusia, País Basc i Europa en general. IV Jornada de Qualitat a l’ensenyament i intercanvi d’experiències Barcelona, 18 de novembre de 2004. Philip Pedersen

richard_edik
Download Presentation

Ponència A

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. Ponència A La Qualitat a l’ensenyament dins EuropaUna visió dels diferents sistemes de gestió de centres educatius de Dinamarca, Andalusia, País Basc i Europa en general IV Jornada de Qualitat a l’ensenyament i intercanvi d’experiències Barcelona, 18 de novembre de 2004 Philip Pedersen Inspector General del Ministeri d’Educació de Dinamarca

  2. Presentation at ConferenceMinistry of Education, CataloniaBarcelona 18th of November 2004v. Philip Pedersen +45 3392 5709, philip.pedersen@uvm.dk • Topic: • Quality Assurance in Europe and Denmark: • The Present and Future. • Why focus on quality assurance? • How to work with quality assurance? • Point for reflection – based on the Danish experience • What to come: at European and national level?

  3. 1.Why focus on quality assurance? ...at European and national level?

  4. European cooperation Lisbon, 2000, European Council: “European as the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world in 2010, capable of economic growth and greater social cohesion” Barcelona-resolution, 2002, European Council: Making Europeans education/training system a world quality reference by 2010 with 3 targets: • promote quality and efficiency in education • make access to the education system easier • open up educational systems to a wider world Coordinated with the Bologna declaration: Higher Educ.1999

  5. The needs and objectives, 2001 • Life Long Learning: To link and combine different learning • outcomes • Mobility: To earn and use qualifications and competences as a • common currency (common qualification framework) • To have high quality qualifications which have standing in an • international market • European employment strategy:The need to focus on trans- • parency, recognition, and quality, and to develop mutual trust

  6. The Brügge and Copenhagen-process The Copenhagen declaration, nov. 2002: Enhanced cooperation in Vocational Education and Training. The aim is to enhance mutual trust, transparency and recognition of qualifications and competences in order to promote mobility and access to life long learning. Cooperation based on “The Open Method of Coordination” • Organized in 3 working groups: • Transparency, information and guidance • Recognition af competences and qualifications • Quality assurance

  7. The Copenhagen-process and Quality Promoting cooperation in quality assurance with special focus in exchange of models, and methodes, as well as a common criteria and principles for qiuality in vocational education and training Giving attention to the learning needs of teachers and trainers witin all form of vocational education and training

  8. 2. How to work with quality assurance? ...at European level

  9. Why focus on Quality Assurance? • Quality assurance is not a need in it self! • Quality assurance is a means of: • enhancing educational quality • getting better knowledge of national standard and quality • creating a better basis for benchmarking • contributing to more transparency • Ambition: • To contribute to Mutual Trust between the nations • and enhance mobility in Europe.

  10. Common Quality Assurance Framework A model: For quality assurance based on the Quality Circle to be used at system level and institutional level Methodology: For assesment and review of systems: self-assesment (guide) to be combined with external evaluation Measurement tools: A set of reference indicators based on 3 European objectives in order to monitoring af evaluate their own system Monitoring system: To be identified as appropriate at national or regional level, and possibly combined with voluntatry peer review

  11. Common Quality Assurance Framework =C QAF Planning (Purpuse and plan) Methodology Review (feedback and procedures for change) Implementation Evaluation and Assessment

  12. Objectives and indicators 1.Unemployability according to groups 2.Participation rate in IVET and LLL 3. Succesfull completion rate of training 1.Employability 4.Schemes to promote better acces 5.Prevalence of vulnerable groups: participation/completion/employability 2.Access 6.Mechanisms to relate developments in labour- market VET-systems 7.Destination of trainees 6 month after training 8.Utilisation of acquired skills at the work place 3. Matching supply/demand 4. Quality M systems 9. Share of VET-providers applying Quality 10.Management systems like CQAF Investment in training of teachers

  13. 3.Points for reflection based on the Danish approach to quality assurance

  14. Points for Focus – based on Danish experiences 1.Centralised vs. Decentralised educational system 2.Voluntary or obligatory quality assurance 3.Involvement of Stakeholders: social partners/trainees,students 4. Internal vs. External evaluation 5. Check and balance vs. Control 6.Transparency: More or less transparent processes and results (output/outcomes)

  15. The Danish Educational System

  16. DK – small is maybe not always beautiful but… 2000 Primary and lower secondary Schools 157 Gymnasier =General Upper Secondary Education 25 Social and Health Colleges 17 Agricultural Colleges 47 Technical Colleges 48 Commercial Colleges TREND: FEWER 10 with Technical + Commercial

  17. DK: 3 basic principles Preliminary Pragmatic Pluralistic

  18. View of development af quality assurance, DK Consequence: Political agreement: VET 2003-06 Regulation: Openness and transparency 2002 Implementation: Regulation on quality: VET, 2000 Q-questionaire 1998 Common references: Q-90 1996-97 (project) Q-strategi 1995 The first steps: Local initiatives Research and dev. projects

  19. DK: Approaches to Quality assurance, 2004 5. Quality rules 1.Common guidelines 6. The Danish Eval. Institute 2.Testing and examination Approach to Quality Assurance and Development 7. Transparency and openness 3.Ministerial appro- val and inspection 8.International surveys 4. Involvement of stakeholders 9. Output management

  20. CQAF and Danish quality approach 1.Common guidelines 4.Involvement of Stakeholders Plan Methodology Q-regulation: Selfevaluation Review (feedback + procedures for change) Implementation 4.Stakeholders/3.Min. Approval+inspection/ 9.Output/outcomes/7.Transparency+Openess 4.Involvement of stakholders/ 9.Innovationa + devel. projects Evaluation and Assessment 4.Involvement of stakeholders/3.Min. Approval and inspection/2.Examination/6.EVA

  21. Quality rules in VET, 2000/2004 PART 1 In-company training Follow up on the in-company training by Trade Committes

  22. Quality rules in VET, 2000/04 Part 2: School education: 1. The College must have a quality-system for quality improvement and the achievement of the education 2. The College must have a procedure for self-evaluation and quality-development: a. The teaching fulfils the goals of the education (VET) b. On-going development of the local educational plan c. Method of teaching must support the goals of the education and the subjects d. Practical training and theoretical training must support each other e. Teachers: professional (subjects and method) updating f. The colleges get the students’ assesment of teaching and local educational planning g. External examiner comments, results on marks and assesment of teaching must be included h. Individual plans for every student/trainee based on their conditions and needs 3. On the basis of a self-evaluation the College must make a plan for followup, need of changes: solutions and operational targets - and put on the College’s web

  23. Danish Evaluation Institute, 1999 • Evaluations: • participation obligatory • selfevaluation obligatory • respect for local practices • reports public • no ranking • Independent: • methods for evaluation • evaluation group • not authority, not supervision PRINCIPLES: • Organisation: • independent, governmental • institution • independent board and council • separated from Ministry • Minister of Educ.: • appoint chairman/board • approve: director + action plan • responsability: follow up

  24. Danish Evaluation Institute 1 (1999) Danish Evaluation Institute, 1999 AIM: to secure and develop quality in education and teaching/learning • Focus on development and quality assurance of: • programmes and teaching/learning • could be: an institution’s total performance • control with the institutions is not a point • dialogue with the Ministry of Education • National centre of knowledge: • develop methods for evaluation • nationally/internationally • center for information • Type of evaluations: • on EVA’s initiatives • obligatory: Student grants • requested evaluations

  25. Danish Evaluation Institute 3 (1999) Example of evaluations 2002-2004: www.eva.dk • Student in Voc. Upper Sec. Educ. Preparation for further education • Teachers’ further education and training in VET-colleges • The VET-trainees’ personal educational plan • Quality assurance in VET by involvement of social partners (2004) • Subject: English in primary schools • Subject: English in upper secondary educ. at level A and B • Education of teachers for Primary Schools • University: Faculty evaluation of German-studies • University: ”Basis-educ.” in social science at to Universities

  26. Transparency and openness (2002) • The instistutions are obliged to public on their web-site: • The supply of education and programmes • The pedagogical foundation of values and educational principles • The average of the final grades • The results of the evaluations of the teaching • Information which the school finds essential for the assesment of • the teaching supplied. • All areas of education and all types of institutions are included. The • Law is formulated in a general way, but has been adjusted to ”language” • and the practise of each area of education.

  27. Transparency and openness (2002) • The purpose of the law: • To give the users: pupils, students, parents and managements transparent and relevant information • To give the educational institutions a possibility to share ideas and experience • To give the public (politicians/organisations) an impression of the quality etc. of the institutions and the educational systems. • Principles for information on college web-sites: • Easy accessible, manageable and of current interest • Comparative • Providable without huge costs for the colleges

  28. Bench marking betweeen schools, an ex. Network between 7 business colleges based on agreed principles, methodes and questions put to 764 students Note: 6= just passed; 8=avarage performance, 13 = excellent performance

  29. Output Management, 2003 An Agreement in Parliament for 4 years: ”The institutions get value for money” IMPLEMENTATION • Completion of part of or the full education • Practical training places QUALITY DEVELOPMENT SUBSIDY • Qualification development of teachers • School contact with local enterprices and community • Systematic quality development- Professionally e.g. final grades, evaluations- Flexibility e.g. individual credits • Professional management by staff From 2003-06 also grants for: • Every student completing his/her program • Documetation of quality on selected themes

  30. CQAF and Danish quality approach Plan for evaluations next year:public Planning (Purpuse and plan) Methodology Implementation Review (feedback and procedures for change) Plan for follow up next year Supervision of performance Evaluation and Assessment Output: results, public

  31. 4.What to come? at European and national level?

  32. What to come? • In Denmark: • Qualify and make visible that quality assurance works at • institutional level • Further development of quality indicators • Motivate institutions for Leonardo-projects • Continuing dialogue with social partners • At European level: • More countries and social partners involved in the work • More inspiration and benchmarks between the countries • Further qualification of the Indicators • to use Quality Assurance as a means to promote mutual trust and transparancy

  33. THANKS! • ..for listening. • Philip Pedersen, General Inspector of Education • Danish Ministry of Education • Departement of Vocational Education and Training • I work primarily with Policy and Management: • Examinations and test • Quality approach and assurance in VET and in General • EU-projects: Working Group on Quality, • Leonardo da Vinci-commitee, European Training Foundation • Nordic projects and network

  34. Appendix The Danish Vocational System

  35. The Ministry of Education National Education Authority: Primary and Lower/Upper Secondary Education Upper General Education Vocational and Further Vocational Education Further Education (non Universities) National Authority for Institutional Affairs: Departement for the Administration of Finances Departement for the Administration of Institutions State Educational Grant and Loan Scheme Agency

  36. The Danish Adult Education and Training System

  37. Principles - in a liberal-conservative educational policy Objectives: • Solid qualifications and competences • Effecient use of resources Principles: • Common national ”standards” at a high level • Test and examination system • Management by output and focus on results Initiatives: • ”Something – for - something” • Regulations about Quality/ and a new concept for supervision

  38. VET in Denmark 1: colleges • Technical colleges or • Business colleges or • Combination of college and AMU-centre • And : All colleges have co-operation agreements • VET-colleges provide: • Initial and further vocational programmes • Vocational Upper Secondary Education • Short-cycle further Education • Courses for companies • A VET- or AMU-college is: • a non-profit institution run by a board (social partners/local authorities • accountable to the Ministry and funded by the state • Ex: Middelsize: App. 1000 full time students, 75 teachers + 25 staff- • members. App. 53 mill. Dkr turnover

  39. VET in Denmark 2: some points 1. Dual system: Work-placed (2/3) and College-based 2. Apprenticeship with a salary for the trainnes  3. Personal education plan  and career guidance  4. Certificate: external certification   5. Social partners play a central role 6. Flexibility: duration/changes/recognition of prior learning  7. Quality assurance obligatory  8. VET provided by 140 colleges with own board 9. Target- and framework management 10.Taximeter based system

  40. VET in Denmark 3: structure • Basic courses: typically 20 weeks • Technology and communication • Building and construction • Craft and engineering trades • Food production and catering • Mechanical enginering, transport and logistics • Service industries • Commerce and clerical trade • Main courses: typically 3-3½ year (dual system) • app. 90 VET-educations • but app. 200 specialised lines • work-based and college based training

  41. VET in Denmark 4: The use of ”Elevplan” • What’s in it for the Students?: • Helps the student and his teacher to define his personal Education • Plan and Educational Portfolio • … and for the Teachers? • Supports the definition of learning activities • Helps the teacher to get a general view of which competences a certain student has achieved and which he needs to achieve • … and for the Public? • Informs educational advisers, parents, employers and future students • about vocational education and training • Illustrates the possibilities of the reform • Branding the reform

  42. VET in Denmark 4. Personal educational plan • Trainees have ”log-books”=Individual study portofolios: • Overview • Documentation • Dialogue tool between school/company • Trainees have a Personal Educational Plan: • The Selected VET • Learning Pathways • Reflection on Learning: school /company • Life Long Learning reflection and choices

  43. VET in Denmark 5: Funding Per student funding: Taximeter for teaching expenses: Teachers’ wages/materials/curriculum/development/ Etc. + Taximeter for joint expenses: Buildings/Administration/Curriculum/Bording facilities = College fundings: Annual number of students plus taximeter per student • From 2003-06 also grants for: • Every student completing his/her program • Documentation of quality on selected themes

  44. Social partners and the VET sector Ministry of Education: Area of VET Council for VET (1) Trade Committes for VET (2) • Board • Managers • COLLEGE: • Technical • Commercial • Agricultural • Social/Health Local Educational Committes (sectorial) (3)

  45. Trends i VET-reform, 2003 • More goal oriented towards job profiles • More differentiated programmes: • * theoretical and practical side of qualifications • Qualifications/skills at different levels in a program • 4. Simplicity: common framework • Flexibility: duration, individual asssesment, crossing entrances • ”Real competences”: formal, non-.formal, informal

  46. Challenges in VET, 2004 • Make VET more attractive • Better match: ”supply/demand” and Apprenticeship • Flexible VET and Life Long Learning

More Related