A Nordic model for Quality in Validation

1. A Nordic model for Qualityin Validation Seminar in Stockholm May 29. 2013 A Nordplus-project Anne Marie Dahler – Håkon Grunnet NVR - Danmark

2. Project-partners • Island: Specialist VPL HaukurHardason, Frædslumidstöd, Reykjavik. (ETSC - Education and Training Service Centre) • Norge: Senior Advisor Camilla Alfsen, VOX – NationaltFagorganfor Kompetansepolitikk, Oslo (2011-12: SeniorrådgiverMargrethe Steen Hernes, VOX) • Sverige: PärSellberg, Myndighetenfor Yrkeshögskolan, Västerås. (Swedish National Agency for Higher Vocational Education) (2011-12: Anna Kahlson, Myndigheten for Yrkeshögskolan, Västerås) • Finland: Expert in European Educational Policy Anni Karttunen, Savon Koulutuskuntayhtymä, Kuopio (SavoConsortium for Education) • Danmark: associateprofessorAnne Marie Dahler and consultant Håkon Grunnet, NationaltVidenscenter for Realkompetence, Aarhus

3. Quality in Validation – the project • 2 years – one project (2011-12, 2012-13) • First: a mapping project ( 5 country-reports)  • Second: making an operational model for work with Quality in Validation • Nordic cooperation  a ‘Nordic model’. A generic model for quality assurance (?) • Steering-group: Nordiskt Expertnätverk för Validering. NVL – Nordiskt Nätverk för Vuxnas Lärande • Supportet by NORDPLUS – Adult

4. Quality in Validation? “The establishment of and adherence to policies, processes and assessment practices that maximize individuals’ opportunities to fully and accurately demonstrate relevant knowledge, skills and competencies” (Joy Van Kleef) Van Kleef points to different general mechanisms that can be applied to quality in validation. These are as follows: • Legislation • Government policies • Collaborative mechanisms • Institution-based mechanisms • Indirect stakeholder support

5. 3 perspectives on quality in validation • Ensuringorganisationalquality • Through a holisticapproach for institutions work on validationof prior learning • Through evaluationcadences, feedback, and improvement initiatives at all levels • Ensuringassessmentquality • Through distinctcriteria • Through substantiated choices of methodology • Through establishing of evaluation and documentationpractice • Ensuring procedural quality, around the assessment • Through distinct responsibility and role distribution (who does what, when, and for whom?) • Through presentations and information (websites, brochures, mails/letters etc.) • Through professional filing and document handling

6. What about the preconditions?: Legislation, government policies & collaborative mechanisms.. The term preconditions (here) means the regulatory framework for the validation work, national and local policies in the area, if validation activities are funded, and how they are funded, how co-operation with other stakeholdersis organized, and if validation is based on standards or competency criteriathat are known. The validation staff & the educational institution cannot change the preconditions, setting the framework for validation practice in the individual institutions. But you can reflect on, how preconditions influence the quality of the validations.

7. Who can use the quality model – who are the target groups? The quality model is a tool for leaders and employeesat educational/advisory and other institutions working with validation (e.g. companies using validation) This means that the model is targeted towards quality assurance both at organizational level, at procedural level, and at guidance and assessment levels

8. The task(for the projectgroup): Make an operationel quality-model • The task is to develop a model for quality work in validation, which can be use by practitioners in there validation work. Quality developing in and by praxis • Based on • The first Nordplus-project report on quality in validation in the Nordic countries, research (literature) & • Project members experiences • Testing: In different institutional and sectorial contexts, different from country to country. Eg. Finland put focus on VET - level 4 both NQF and EQF for adults.

9. Inspiration…. Different perspectives Different models ………….many ways

10. Kriterier och riktlinjer för validering av reell kompetens(Datum: 2012-08-23 Diarienummer: YH 2012/428, page 12)

11. Kriterier och riktlinjer för validering av reell kompetens (Datum: 2012-08-23 Diarienummer: YH 2012/428, page 16)

12. Revision of the Guidelines on Validation of non formal and informal learning: first revised draft

13. Ministeriet for Børn og Undervisning, Uddannelsesstyrelsen, Danmark, November 2011. Rapport

14. A simple model – with 8 quality factors

15. Workscheme…

16. Testing: different educational level and area in each country • Norway – focus on HE and exemptions • Island – focus on upper secondary / lower educations including NQF level 3 EQF level 4. • Sweden – focus on the sector industry organizations • Finland – focus on VET - level 4 both NQF and EQF for adults • Denmark – focus on third sector and 3 F (Trade union)

17. Interviews/ workshops with practitioners (in validation) • Practically: the country representative (CR) will set up one (or more?) interviews/ workshops with relevant persons/ practitioners from the institutions/ sector, which is chosen • The model and the worksheets will be presented and discussed and qualified. Is it understandable? Does the model cower all relevant aspects of quality in the validation work? Is the model useful? In which ways – and if not: why? • Points of interests…! Good examples of quality work in validation? • The CR will then gather information from the interviews/ workshop, summarizeand qualify the material

18. Interviews – workshops… Exampel: Quality faktor assessment Assessment – quality indicators: How to work with quality in validation regarding assessment? Testing the indicators Assessment – experiences: Experiences regarding assessmentand the quality model

19. Literature… • Grunnet, Håkon: ”Kvalitet i anerkendelse af realkompetencer”, in: ”Anerkendelse af realkompetencer – en grundbog”. red. K.Aagaard og A.M.Dahler (VIASystime, Aarhus & København 2010). • Revision of the Guidelines on Validation of non formal and informal learning: first revised draft”(12 July 2011. Interntarbejdspapir) • RKV-arbejdsgruppens rapport om anderkendelse af realkompetencer (Ministeriet for Børn og Undervisning, Uddannelsesstyrelsen, Danmark, November 2011) • Van Kleef, J.: Kvalitet i vurderingoganerkendelseafrealkompetencer, in: ”Anerkendelse af realkompetencer – en antologi” red. K.Aagaardog A. M.Dahler (ViaSystime, Aarhus & København 2011). Heri findes en omfattende litteraturliste. • Van Kleef, J.: PLAR: Finding Quality in the Dynamics of Social Practice. PLAIO, Prior Learning Assessment Inside Out, Volume 1, Number 2, 2012

20. Links Links • CEDEFOP. (2009). European Guidelines for validating nonformal and informal learning. www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/about-cedefop/projects/validation-of-non-formal-and-informallearning/ european-guidelines.aspx • COU NCIL RECOMMENDATION of 20 December 2012 on the validation of non-formal and informal learning (2012/C 398/01) http://eur- ex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:398:0001:0005:EN:PDF • Kleef, Joy Van (2010). Quality in Prior Learning, Assessment and Recognition. A Background Paper. www.viauc.dk/projekter/NVR/Documents/Kvalitetskodeks/joy%20van%20kleef%20 quality%20paper.pdf • MYH – Myndigheten för Yrkeshögskolen (2012). Kriterier och riktlinjer för valideringavreellkompetens(YH 2012/428) (Seek at: www.valideringsinfo.se)

21. Thank you….