Flexibility through Learning Outcomes: Implications for Quality

1. Flexibility through Learning Outcomes: Implications for Quality Elpida Keravnou-Papailiou Chairperson KYSATS University of Cyprus EQAF 2008

2. Presentation Outline • Flexibility in learning • Incremental development • Is a convergence between traditional and non-traditional learning pathways possible? • Common learning outcomes • Agreed quality standards • Learning and associated effort • Conclusions

3. Flexibility in Learning(for higher level qualifications)tentative definition A state of affairs whereby learners can move horizontally or vertically, within and across diverse forms and hence learning pathways (formal, non-formal, informal) transferring and accumulating learning achievements (across or within the different learning routes) where diverse spatio-temporal frames are permitted and the formal accreditation/certification of the learning achievements is possible.

4. Is the proposition of full flexibility in learning a viable one? • This would depend critically on whether • The same or at least comparable learning outcomes could be potentially achievable through diverse learning pathways • The potential means for assessing such learning outcomes could credibly assure quality

5. Incremental development of learning flexibility NQF HE VET flexibility in learning LEARNING OUTCOMES open and distance learning credits discrete cycles

6. Is a convergence possible? • Non-formal/Informal Learning • Early stage (Bologna Stocktaking 2007) • Other actors apart from HEIs • No standards for the transfer/accumulation of credits • No European quality standards • Formal Learning • Well established and understood • HEIs have major/exclusive role • Transfer/accumulation of credits well defined • Well established criteria & procedures for recognition of qualifications (LRC) • ESG for QA • Point of reference for higher level qualifications FL quality standards IL NFL Role of Qualifications Frameworks?

7. Quality StandardsMinimum requirements regarding • Specification of actual learning outcomes for particular qualifications (cycles/disciplines) • Criteria and procedures for the validation and certification of the achieved learning • Criteria and procedures for assessing the assessors

8. Quality in Learninggrounded on following premises • Actual learning outcomes may be specified • Independently of learning settings and curricula, and • Everyone understands the same thing about them • The means for assessing the learning outcomes are valid and fit for purpose, and the assessors and credible and competent for this task

9. Learning Outcomesfor higher level qualifications • Cannot be confined to practical skills and competencies • Domain knowledge figures as a major component • Learning outcomes (level descriptors) in qualifications frameworks are abstract statements, open to widely different interpretations

10. Example Scenario:acquiring a PhD degree in an informal learning setting • The person (a “researcher”) is carrying out self-directed research at workplace • S/he publishes results in scientific journals • An authority that has the right to award PhD degrees assesses the learning outcomes (research results) and awards this person a PhD degree

11. In the example scenario thetraditional quality standards for PhD degrees are adhered to, namely • Contribution to knowledge • The publications demonstrate this • Publishability of research results • Not just “publishable”, they have been published • Potential to do independent research • Has been doing so all along

12. Thus in the example scenario quality has not been adversely affected What about, though, the more basic Bologna cycles, the Bachelor and Masters degrees

13. Questions arising • Could the learning experiences from following a formal Bachelor/Masters programme be ever comparable to the learning experiences accruing from an informal work-based context, albeit of many years duration?

14. Questions arising • Could such comparisons be unfair? But is it fair to grant the same recognition to substantially different learning achievements underpinned by different quality standards?

15. Questions arising • Should it be acknowledged that within the same level/cycle there could be distinct types of qualifications based on the learning setting, e.g. academic, professional or vocational Bachelor or Masters degrees?

16. Qualifications Frameworks • Bologna Stocktaking 2007: • Observation: the procedures for the recognition of prior learning are at an early stage of development in the majority of countries • Recommendation: link recognition of prior learning with the development of NQFs and with systems of credit transfer and accumulation

17. Qualifications Frameworks • Dec 2007 issue of European Journal of Education • the concept of a QF is critically analyzed in an evidence-based manner • the ability of QFs to promote and accredit informal learning is questioned • few countries have fully fledged NQFs • these have evolved over a long period and are still evolving

18. NQFs are not a panacea and a solution to everything In parallel with the development of NQFs, flexibility in learning should be grounded on agreed European quality standards for learning settings outside the formal setting

19. Learning and associated effort • Learning is measured • Qualitatively through its (learning) outcomes • Quantitatively through the effort leading to the outcomes • “effort” translates into credits of some kind • ECTS couples outcomes with credits (learner workload) • But there is also ECVET

20. Learning and associated effort • Developments call for different time-frames to learning • However the notion of “learning effort” cannot be abolished • should be defined in a way applicable to different learning settings • Flexibility in learning should not come to mean that it would be easier to acquire some qualification through non traditional learning pathways • if anything the effort outside the formal setting for a comparable learning achievement should be higher • cf the example scenario with the PhD degree

21. Conclusions • Flexible learning is an acknowledged necessity for a knowledge society • HEIs should have a significant role in flexible learning • cf June 2008 supplement of EUA Bologna Handbook • There is an urgent need to agree on European standards for quality, outside the formal learning setting • Specification and validation of learning outcomes • Quality assurance of assessors • Formal setting should continue to be the reference point for higher level qualifications

22. Discussion Question 1 • Can non-formal/informal learning achieve the same or at least adequately comparable learning outcomes as those obtained through programmes of formal study at the three Bologna cycles?

23. Discussion Question 2 • Can qualifications built on, or incorporating non-formal/informal learning have the same or comparable value as those achieved through formal programmes of study? Would it be advisable to introduce a typology of 1st, 2nd and 3rd cycle qualifications based on the learning pathway followed?

24. Discussion Question 3 • How can the European standards and guidelines for quality assurance be extended to include quality standards for non-formal/informal learning?