Designing a National Qualifications Framework: the Experience of Hungary

1. Designing a National Qualifications Framework: the Experience of Hungary Qualifications Framework Baku Seminar 12 June 2007

2. European Dimensions 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.”

3. Stocktaking 2007Indicator 3: Implementation of national qualifications framework

4. Stocktaking • Most countries in the green category had started developing their national frameworkbefore 2005: some have taken ten to fifteen years to complete • There is a concern among some of the other countries that the goalof having national frameworks in place by 2010 might rush the national process. They recognize thatwhile the principles of the framework can be introduced in legislation relatively quickly, it is likely to takesome years before the framework is fully implemented. • A great effort needs to be made before 2010, a lot ofwork to be done in many countries, and there is a need to consider what kinds of support canbe provided through the Bologna Process to help • Continuation of the regional workshops started in the 2005-2007 period, having anappropriate international organisation or network to facilitate meetings and the creation of an expertpool, as suggested by the Qualifications Frameworks Working Group. • Developing national frameworks of qualifications will bring together a number of strands of the BolognaProcess, all of which are based on a learning outcomes approach: quality assurance; credit transfer andaccumulation systems; recognition of prior learning; lifelong learning; flexible learning paths and thesocial dimension.

5. The London Communiqué • Some initial progress but much more effort is required • Commitment to fully implementing such frameworks, certified against the overarching Framework for Qualifications of the EHEA, by 2010. • Council of Europe is asked to support the sharing of experience in the elaboration of national qualifications frameworks.

6. Principles • 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.

7. Why ‘new style’ national frameworks? • Purposes of qualifications and qualification systems • Routes of progression, points of integration and overlap between different qualifications • Recognizes the complexity of qualifications • A nationally agreed framework that reflects the agreement of stakeholders • Effects on the relationship between national authorities and institutions 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 (entry and exit points, alternative routes) • Influence the reform of qualifications to better serve social and economic needs)

8. The Hungarian Situation • Continental traditions • Several subsystems (not frameworks) co-exist • Facing a lot of new challenges (internationalization, student numbers, social and economic expectations) • Advantages: an opportunity to review qualifications and the whole 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 • Coordination: No single agency as yet

9. Hungary - The main challenge Issues of quantity and quality • levels of participation in higher education • the content and the quality of learning The main aim: „Hungary must shortly have a system of higher education that by making the best use of its resources will be able to contribute to the country’s effective integration into the community of developed countries, and will also serve the construction of a knowledge-based society.” A major objective: to create a framework for a modern course structure that will also be able to better react to demands of the labour market;

10. Recommendations: • Review the education system as a whole (public and vocational, lifelong learning); • Re-examine vocational and academic needs and create an integrated system of qualifications that will gradually bring closer education and training; • The implication of an integrated framework of qualifications should be considered at the level of curriculum practice.

11. Important Aspects • The curriculum that was established when at most 10% continued in highereducation, is not appropriate when at least 35-40% are expected to continue at least for three years after 18. • Existing participation on the basis of existing curricula, even when it is possible, would not provide students with the kind of skills and knowledge that are necessary in the likely circumstances of the twenty first century. • Learner independence – the empowerment of students • New methods of student assessment are required.

12. Aims of the Framework • 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.

13. How do we start? • There should be some institutional base and co-ordination • 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

14. Approach • A clear understanding of the conceptual foundation (levels, descriptors, etc.) • A shift from standardized content, organization and delivery of qualifications • In terms of components the framework will include levels and outcome focused indicators (credits). Credits expressed in learning outcomes, levels and workload give coherence and clarity to the system • 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 and quality • Even if we think of one particular sector to start with, it is important to promote multiple pathways into and through that sector – LLL • The framework has a regulatory function - legal status • The framework should be linked to standards, internal and external reference points, national and institutional quality assurance systems • There should be public understanding of the achievements represented by different qualifications to achieve public confidence in standards.

15. Learning outcomes as building blocks of qualifications frameworks • 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 intentionThere 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. -        

16. 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 being 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.

17. Co-operation Mechanisms and Trust-building • A national mechanism for developing and approving a framework, the legal background, implementation plan; • 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 the EHEA framework; • The relationship between the national and the European framework is verified through a self-certification process, as a national responsibility;

18. Challenges • The use of credits to quantify learning outcomes - direct links with learning outcomes, • Implications for curriculum design, teaching, learning and assessment - a very long and time-consuming process, • The process assumes close co-operation and consensus between all stakeholders, • How learning outcomes link into accreditation and quality assurance? • Short cycle degrees in the framework; • The future of the binary system; • The employability of graduates; • Progression from one cycle to the next.

19. Implications for Curriculum Development • Set up subject specific coordination groups or pilot projects at national level to help with the development of new curricula. • New approaches to curriculum design, teaching, learning and assessment - a very long and time-consuming process, • Opportunity to revise pedagogical concepts by introducing student-centred learning, modular structures and clearly defined learning outcomes for the various degrees • More emphasis on developing skills and competencies • Greater need for individual student work, methods that lead to better communication skills, creativity and innovation • Balance between specialist knowledge and generic skills, with an emphasis on ”learning to learn • Dividing teaching contents between the two cycles • Introduction of new quality criteria emphasising final competences • Student involvement in planning of study programmes

20. Steps/stages:

21. “We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein