Implementation of new National Qualification System in Belarus (NQS) in Belarus - next steps Seminar, Minsk 25-26 May 22016 THE INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT: The European Higher Education Area (EHEA) - the challenges of higher education reform Stephen Adam, Council of Europe The implementation of new NQF has profound implications for higher education
THE INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT: THE EUROPEAN HIGHER EDUCATION AREA (EHEA), BOLOGNA PROCESS, NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS (NQF) AND THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE. 1. ‘ We note that some initial progress has been made towards the implementation of national qualifications frameworks, but that much more effort is required. Recognising that this is a challenging task, we ask the Council of Europe to support the sharing of experience in the elaboration of national qualifications frameworks.’ (London Communiqué, 2007) 2.The Council of Europe provides policy and practical help, supports the network of national correspondents to facilitate the development of NQF, etc. 3.Meeting of the Advisory Group on support of the Belarus Roadmap will take place at Minsk, 2-3 June 2016. QF-EHEA = 48 states EQF: (EU + EEA) = 32
THE YEREVAN “Together we are engaged in a process of voluntary COMMUNIQUE 2015 convergence and coordinated reform of our higher education systems. This is based on public responsibility for higher education, academic freedom, institutional autonomy, and commitment to integrity. It relies on strong public funding, and is implemented through a common degree structure, a shared understanding of principles and processes for quality assurance and recognition, and a number of common tools.” (Yerevan Communiqué) This represents a massive and often underestimated set of commitments + The EC Skills agenda (04/2016) raises important new dimensions associated with referencing NQF to the EQF and EHEA (see: http://www.eua.be/Libraries/default-document-library/ec-consultation- paper-on-skills-agenda-for-europe-to-bfug-(003).pdf?sfvrsn=0)
UPDATE: ON THE YEREVAN MINISTERIAL COMMUNIQUE (14-15 May 2015) Profound implications for all… ① Implementation of structural reforms is uneven - tools not always used correctly. ② Serious challenges – economic, social, unemployment, migration, radicalisation, new technology, etc. ③ 2020 deadline for EHEA common goals implementation - priorities include: • Enhancing the quality and relevance of learning and teaching - including student-centred learning, digital technologies, innovative and relevant study programmes, transparent learning outcomes, flexible learning paths + teaching and assessment, etc. • Fostering the employability of graduates • Making systems more inclusive - widen participation, more permeable education systems • Implementing agreed structural reforms - more effective recognition processes, more precise measurement of progress, support to countries experiencing difficulties ④ Governance and working methods of EHEA to develop to meet the above challenges – BFUG to submit proposals for addressing issues of non-implementation ⑤ Commitments: • Adopt new QA ESG; revised ECTS Users’ Guide • Include the short-cycle qualifications in the overarching QF-EHEA • Ensure fair access to public employment to those with first cycle degrees • Record career patterns and progression information in the labour market • Review national legislation to comply with the Lisbon Recognition Convention • Remove obstacles to the Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) • Make higher education more inclusive ⑥ Belarus to join Bologna process and France to host the next meeting in 2018
STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE IN THE EUROPEAN HIGHER EDUCATION AREA 2015 ‘The focus of the ESG is on quality assurance related to learning and teaching in higher education, including the learning environment and relevant links to research and innovation. In addition institutions have policies and processes to ensure and improve the quality of their other activities, such as research and governance.’ The ESG are based on the following four principles for quality assurance in the EHEA: 1. Higher education institutions have primary responsibility for the quality of their provision and its assurance; 2. Quality assurance responds to the diversity of higher education systems, institutions, programmes and students; 3. Quality assurance supports the development of a quality culture; 4. Quality assurance takes into account the needs and expectations of students, all other stakeholders and society. Revised 2015 to take account of NQF, Learning outcomes and student-centered learning.
COMMON RELATED More Detail EUROPEAN + More STANDARDS Complexity + Different Functions + There is a linked all use cascade of learning related level outcomes! descriptors designed to ensure similar standards across Europe (based on learning outcomes). The effective implementation and proper use of these is really difficult.
STPEHEN ADAM: stephenadam@orange.fr COMPLEX UNIVERSITY REFORM CHALLENGES… CONTEXT: National • Growth in demand Qualification New technology • Constrained funding Regulations, Frameworks EQF + policies, • Demographic change (NQF) governance • Increased competition EHEA established. • Globalisation but objectives not Rethink role + autonomy achieved Modernisation agenda Mission Restructure Staff training statement/diversit Multiple functions y in university of HE: research, C URRENT E UROPEAN H IGHER roles citizenship/democrati E DUCATION R EFORM I SSUES c values, personal Revenue sources – development, UNIVERSITY Finance and employability, etc. mergers! S U R V I V A L ? Quality Assurance Curriculum RANKINGS ? reform/developme ESG : Internal + nt External + agency Student- centered Recognition issues Markets learning (Diploma Borderless Supplement + education (TNE) Employability Lisbon Recognition Credit Systems + Internationalisation Convention + RPL) confusions Learning outcomes – ECTS v ECVET delivery assessment
SOME COMMON HE REFORM SOME POSSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEMS SOLUTIONS ? 1. Creating decorative, isolated and non-implementable NQF 1. Create detailed Implementation plans 2. Poor NQF level descriptors + no supporting subject specific 2. Test, refine + develop SBS/Sectoral statements + descriptors Occupational Standards (detailed descriptors required) 3. Using disjointed, poorly integrated educational reform tools 3. Adopt a simultaneous reform agenda that embraces all + ignoring the lifelong learning agenda NQF sectors of education + shows linkages between tools 4. Absence of detailed, resourced, timetabled reform 4. Review progress and identify measurable outcomes + implementation plans adjust if no progress 5. Failure to embed internal and external quality assurance 5. Evaluate the effectiveness of quality assurance processes within the whole system and procedures + use ESG as a catalyst for change 6. Omitting key stakeholders from the reform process 6. Involve students and employers + embed them in systems 7. Disjunctions between top-down and effective bottom-up reform 7. Integrate policies + ensure any new educational laws are fully implemented and are workable 8. Failure to reform university structures, processes and policies 8. Re-think higher education institutions + re-examine status, missions, typology, number and functions 9. Unresolved tensions between academic/institutional autonomy and national system control 9. Phased autonomy for selected institutions + rigorous external quality assurance control 10. Lack of trained national/local experts to support higher education reform 10. Select and rigorously train local/national experts in all EHEA reforms + meticulously assess/test trainees 11. Poor understanding of the role and impact of ‘learning outcomes’ 11. Develop proper national/local training and support mechanisms - including QA tools 12. Cosmetic reform qualifications + no serious qualifications rethink 12. Adopt (and evaluate) robust internal and external quality assurance processes - reject unreformed qualifications 13. No clear strategy to implant ‘employability’ into HE qualifications 13. Structure ‘employability skills’ into the curriculum development and approval systems 14. Confusions/animosity between academic and the vocational education sector interface 14. Identify real and imagined differences between academic and VET professional qualifications 15. Failure to eradicate defects of the old educational system 15. Acknowledge problems + expose high profile examples 16. Deep opposition to reform by academics, institutions and employers 16. Provide better information and materials + actively engage any opposition in the debate? 17. Other problems ………… 17. Suggested solutions …………
Recommend
More recommend
