Notes on the ECVET Conference -19 th Nov 2014

Transcription

1 Notes on the ECVET Conference -19 th Nov 2014 On 19 November 2014 the Austrian National Agency for Lifelong Learning (OeAD GmbH) - with the support of the Austrian Federal Ministry of Education and Women s Affairs - organised an international ECVET experts conference at the OeAD. The countries represented were : Austria, Germany, Netherlands, Luxemburg, Italy, Poland, Croatia, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Finland, Latvia, Hungary, France, UK, Lichtenstein and Ireland (myself, Diarmuid O Brien, from Ballyfermot College and Michael Bergin from Waterford IT) - 16 in all. There were about 50 delegates present. Austria, Finland, UK and Germany were the main countries present. The aim was to showcase ECVET approaches and initiatives from abroad which had a significant impact on national decision makers and or systems. Speakers and interview partners were experts from CEDEFOP and from European countries. The event targeted: 1. Policy makers involved in ECVET. 2. National ECVET experts. 3. Representatives of ECVET National Coordination Points. The notes here concentrate on the two key note addresses of the conference. Diarmuid O Brien, BCFE Page 1 2/3/2015

2 Key Note 1: Monitoring the implementation of a system which is not a system Ramona David Craescu, CEDEFOP This was one of the major aspects of the conference, that ECVET when compared with ECTS is not at all as coherent and is applied differently and to different extents in different countries. It is not really a system. What is the purpose of ECVET? It is aimed at facilitating the transfer, recognition and accumulation of assessed learning outcomes (LO) of individuals on their way to achieving a qualification: 1 Within national VET systems How is this to be done? Through national common award systems. e.g.: in Ireland through the Common Award System. The QQI Common Award System (CAS) and its credits-based Credit Accumulation and Transfer System (CATS) offers 120 CATS credits for a major award. However this is compatible with the ECVET system of 60 ECVET points for a full academic year of 1200 hours of learning effort. 2 Between national VET systems How is this to be done? By using a common yardstick/single currency-ecvet credits. 3 Between VET and HE How is this to be done? Through compatibility, comparability and complementarity with the ECTS Some problems with no 2: ECVET credit does not necessarily imply credit points and when it does, they do not have a single unit of measure in different countries and do not have a value outside the qualification. Learning outcomes do not all have the same weight within a qualification. It is better and more practical to use a credit point system. Diarmuid O Brien, BCFE Page 2 2/3/2015

3 An analysis was presented of 14 different countries, as to how many of them have a credit system for VET in place and/or are gradually implementing one. At this stage 14 countries operated with units or modules and 8/9 had credits points based on learner workload. So there seems some coherence in that credits points are related to workload and workload will be related to the relevant importance of the learning outcomes within the qualification. 15 countries do not operate with units or modules and 9 of these countries have given no commitment to implement ECVET. So, at present, among the European counties there is wide diversity, so we cannot say we have an ECVET system that is anything like as coherent as the ECTS system at HE. This is 12 years after the first ECVET-related meeting. Key Note 2: Deconstructing ECVET-thoughts and perspectives on ECVET, its composite parts, and other European tools and instruments. Paul Guest, Orientra, UK The major three aspects of ECVET Flexibility, Permeability and Mobility. What do we mean by these three aspects? Flexible learning pathways which support the development, delivery and (most importantly) recognition of learning achieved in different environments (e.g. formal, non-formal and informal learning). Permeability between Higher Education and VET (including Higher VET) Quality assured mobility through which learning achieved during a period of geographical mobility is able to be recognised with a view to contributing to the achievement of vocational qualifications. But, is this enough? Do we not also see calls in the evaluation report (2009) for a system of recognition that is: More Accessible: with lighter, or less complex systems of governance and with obvious benefits for all those choosing to use or adapt ECVET principles. More Realistic: recognising differing ambitions for change (particularly systemslevel change) across different Member States. Diarmuid O Brien, BCFE Page 3 2/3/2015

4 More Homogenous: with existing transparency frameworks, tools and instruments (for example: ECTS, EQAVET, Europass) considered in terms of complementarities and ease of access. Case Study of Scotland In Scotland, in response to changing legal requirements for universities (that centred on widening participation and the recruitment and retention of nontraditional learners) we recently saw the introduction of a common framework for RPL. So, the question remains, is this relevant to ECVET? In my mind, the answer is a definite yes. Whilst true that the initiative has not been ECVET (or VET) led, it is clearly tied to future systems-level developments, promoting flexibility and permeability and facilitating learning recognition. This is increasingly important as we move towards a future that will potentially see an overlap between higher level VET and the Bologna first cycle: 1. In ECVET terms this is a first step towards concerted action that involves stakeholders from HE and VET representing both policy and practice and acknowledges complementarities (a future challenge). 2. In some countries we have already seen attempts to map qualifications across both ECTS and ECVET, particularly for those VET qualifications sitting at levels 5 and 6 of the EQF (is it now these practices that we should focus on with a view to ensuring complementary learning recognition and transfer systems). Mobility is arguably the easiest of the ECVET goals to achieve: there are common documents in circulation which target the improved management planning, implementation and follow up of programmes of geographical mobility. We have mechanisms for sharing tools and experiences (such as the ECVET mobility toolkit) with a view to building sturdy mobility programmes and strong partnerships. Questions: 1. Is ECVET just a badge we are applying on top of Mobility? 2. The trust between the two systems is simply not there. How can we bring ECVET and ECTS closer? Diarmuid O Brien, BCFE Page 4 2/3/2015

5 Some issues with ECVET in a few different countries: Germany: Resistance from Stakeholders especially in apprenticeships where credit system was not implemented/non acceptance of transfers/holistic system v modular system/regulated professions. Finland: Long history of using credits. 20 schools involved in ECVET system and implementation. Luxemburg: Valorisation/large immigration population/qualifications need checking/if flexible with LO s it can work. Good example of the use of ECVET for checking the level of outside qualifications. Summary The conference gave an overview of the state of play in different countries. No conclusions were reached but the conference raised a number of questions as to how ECVET can and should be used going forward, and how it can be brought closer to the ECTS system. Can a common language be found at the interface of the educational systems? (FE and HE) Can a common language be found between education and employers? Can ECVET serve all its original purposes? Transfer and Accumulation of qualifications Support Quality- (especially in mobility) Support Flexibility and non formal qualifications Or should it focus primarily on one purpose only? Perhaps three different focus groups need to develop and promote the three pillars of ECVET. Diarmuid O Brien, BCFE Page 5 2/3/2015