Mutual Learning Workshops: Implementing Upskilling Pathways Workshop summary paper

Transcription

1 Mutual Learning Workshops: Implementing Upskilling Pathways Workshop summary paper Bucharest, Romania, 6-8 November 2017 Introduction The workshops aimed to bring together seven countries to explore the policy actions and practical levers that can support the implementation of the EU Upskilling Pathways (UP) Recommendation. It comprises two sessions: A first session in November 2017 which focused on supporting countries to understand what UP is and develop a to-do list of actions as first steps for implementing UP in their country. A second workshop in April 2018 which is expected to review the early implementation of this list. This will examine what is working well and some of the challenges encountered by Member States and how they could be overcome, and will go further in implementation by focusing on UP steps, enablers and funding. This paper presents the findings from the first workshop which took place in November 2017 in Bucharest, Romania. The workshop took place over 2.5 days. The first day included an overview of the UP Recommendation, discussions on the opportunities and challenges for implementing UP and three good practices from Norway, France and Portugal. The second day comprised discussions on identifying appropriate target groups for UP as well as outreach methods, and presentations and discussions on effective stakeholder mobilisation. The third day included a presentation on Erasmus+ and discussions on the potential actions that countries need to do to implement UP. Attendees The workshop was attended by individuals from Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, Italy, Poland and Spain. Each country sent between five and seven delegates to the workshops. The delegates typically included representatives from the Ministry of Education and Ministry of Labour, employment and adult learning agencies, social partners and in some cases regional and local government agencies with devolved responsibilities for skills and employment. Key findings from Day 1 Presentation on the Council Recommendation on Upskilling Pathways The Commission explained that the overall objective of Upskilling Pathways was to give better life chance to some of the 63 million people in the EU with low basic skills. As well as improving employment and progression opportunities, PIAAC research has shown that individuals with low basic skills are more likely to be far from learning, be unemployed, have health issues and play a less active role in society for instance. It is a key priority for the European Commission, having been mentioned in the recent State of the Union address and as the first principle of the European Pillar of Social Rights. The Council adopted this Recommendation in December , thus marking the commitment of Member States to this initiative. The Recommendation commits Member States to outline appropriate measures for the implementation of the initiative at national level by mid It is expected that this 1 Upskilling Pathways: New Opportunities for Adults ( January,

2 should build on relevant existing national arrangements and financial frameworks and follow a step-by-step approach, which could include the following actions: Identify the existing offer (skills assessment, training, validation) within the country in order to build on it Map out priority groups that could be targeted by this initiative, depending on the specific context of each country. This could include, for example, those in unemployment, older workers and/or women. There needs to be a clear justification for the approach taken. Deliver activities through engagement with all relevant stakeholders, including using existing coordination structures such as the National Coordinators for the European Agenda on Adult Learning. Work to link education and training, employment and social policies for supporting vulnerable groups Use, where possible, existing funding mechanisms such as ESF and Erasmus+, in line with their legal basis and where it links to national priorities and existing Programme objectives. Opportunities, challenges and actions related to UP UP was recognised by the countries in attendance as providing an opportunity to create a more coherent support system for low skilled adults, which brings together Active Labour Market Programmes (ALMP) and adult learning. This could be done by building on the momentum generated by the Recommendation and on existing EU supporting mechanisms, such as the European Agenda on Adult Learning or funding programmes like ESF or Erasmus +. UP could help boosting local economies by investing in people to raise productivity and employment, while also helping vulnerable groups, including lowskilled employed people, onto the skills escalator. Challenges to implement UP may include: Maintaining stable political commitment for implementing UP and tackling fragmented governance Engaging key target groups (e.g. individuals in rural areas) and stakeholders with low interest (e.g. employers) Lack of existing data or research to identify key target groups Secure and sustainable funding to develop or refine existing provision to incorporate the three UP steps Fostering a lifelong learning culture and create incentives for adults to learn Many countries wanted to use the workshop to identify examples of good and effective practice, which could be adapted to their national circumstances. Some also saw it as an opportunity to compare their national approaches to those in other countries and to reflect on what UP components are available in their country and what are missing. Success stories from Norway, France and Portugal SkillsPlus (Norway) The SkillsPlus programme is a national programme which is part of the Ministry of Education but is required to work with other agencies. It was developed in 2000 following the results of a national collective bargaining agreement where employers requested increased investment in basic skills training for their employees. Providers work with employers to deliver training which is predominantly delivered in the workplace. The length and timing of the training is flexible to reflect employer needs, although provision needs to be based on competency goals. Lessons learnt from the implementation of the programme were: Learners that require basic skills training are less likely to enrol on training of their own accord. Marketing therefore needs to be flexible and convey instant January,

3 benefits. The programme for example produced a one-page information sheet, with one side on employer benefits and one side on employee benefits. There is a stigma to undertaking basic skills training. To motivate individuals to participate, some sessions were framed as IT classes, which then embedded literacy and numeracy. Learners are more likely to admit that they have IT skills needs. Workplace learning requires specific teacher training. This includes understanding specific pedagogies that are more effective for teaching in the workplace and work with managers to ensure they can tailor their teaching content to learners work environment. Pathways for Qualifications (France) The Pathways for Qualifications is a sector-specific basic skills and vocational skills programme targeted at hospital workers in 28 first-level (low skilled) jobs. The programme is delivered by ANFH, which is a sector body responsible for administering the training levy imposed on healthcare providers (currently 2.9%). Learners initially undertake a skills assessment by a national contractor that identifies their basic skills needs. This is based on a cross-professional national agreement on basic skills levels. A training programme is then developed based on their needs, which provides training hours. The results of the training, alongside any validated non formal or informal learning, is used to certify learner achievement. After completion, learners are then signposted to professional qualifications at EQF level 3 and 4. Lessons learnt from the implementation of the programme were: The programme initially found that employers had difficulty in identifying low skilled workers. This suggested that they were often hidden. To address this issue the programme targeted workers in certain jobs. There was also employer reluctance to send staff to training so they make sure they communicate upfront the benefits to employers of better user satisfaction with their healthcare and fewer mistakes. Qualifica Programme (Portugal). In 2000 the Government utilised ESF funding to introduce centres for recognition, validation and certification of adults across Portugal. The purpose of these centres was to reduce the number of adults in Portugal with low skills levels. Although the focus of these centres has changed since 2000 following changes in Government priorities, in 2015 the programme was re-launched as Qualifica to focus on supporting less qualified adults, unemployed people and NEETs. The three key tools used by the Qualifica programme are the Qualifica centres, the Qualifica passport and the national credit system for VET. The Qualifica centres provide information, advice and referrals on the recognition and validation of prior learning and then signpost individuals to 50 funded hours of training. There are around 300 centres in Portugal, which are mostly housed in existing providers such as schools. The Qualifica passport is an online tool where qualifications and information on skills acquired are recorded. The online system also provides individuals with guidance on pathways that they could use to complete or obtain new qualifications. The national credit system is aligned to ECVET and used to translate validated non formal or informal learning into credits of a qualification. This helps ensure that learners can undertake flexible pathways which build on what they already know. Lessons learnt from the implementation of the programme were: Credit systems can be used to support learner progression to further learning. In the Qualifica programme, prior attainment is validated against qualification units based on the National Credit System for VET. This allows individuals to January,

4 gain partial achievement of qualifications. Learners can then able to complete the remainder of the full qualification at their own pace. Long-term political and funding commitment is important for ensuring continuity. However, if this is not possible then services need to be flexible to incorporate changing Government priorities and think early about long-term solutions for sustaining activities Key findings from Day 2 Discussion on target groups A range of potential priority target groups of low-skilled adults for UP implementation was identified, including: Active people: employed and unemployed, including those perceived to be disadvantaged in the labour market and young adults (above 25), women, older workers and retired people Inactive people that are usually invisible and harder to reach (not employed, not registered with PES) Refugees and individuals from a migrant background People in rural areas, which have less access to education or training facilities Prisoners Minorities such as Roma communities, particularly those where there have been multiple generations in unemployment Data sources that could be used to map out key target groups included; PES and social security registers and bespoke data requested from trade unions, NGOs, employers and employer associations, regional, national and EU statistics (population census, Adult Education/Labour Force Survey, PIAAC ), and ESF project microdata. There were, however, some reported data gaps. This included a lack of data for identifying low-skilled adults in employment. PIAAC Data on the proportion of low-skilled adults in the workforce was also felt to be a little outdated as the survey took place in 2012, and there is a significant gap until the next survey iteration in Engaging low-skilled adults requires targeted outreach, as these individuals are least likely to walk into the offices of a provider. Some suggestions for engaging these target groups included working with local leaders and authorities, learning providers, social services, civil society networks, PES, employers, social partners, chambers of commerce, libraries, church groups, schools (to engage parents with low-skills), coupled with national or regional campaigns and sectorial approaches. The use of financial incentives, such as training vouchers, was also suggested. Approaches to stakeholder mobilisation Experiences from several countries (EL, IT, HR) show that key success factors for stakeholder involvement in initiatives such as UP include: Cross-ministry steering committees and groups to foster shared ownership as well as local committees adapted to local needs ensuring a top-down cascading effect while in the same time approaching communities from the bottom A sound mapping of the stakeholders that need to be involved, and planning of the extent to which they need to be involved, including beneficiaries. This needs to be pragmatic: it can be more effective to conduct in-depth engagement with a few stakeholders than broad engagement with a wider group. Being realistic and setting achievable goals Early involvement of stakeholders, e.g. by engaging individuals in the co-design of actions, leverages buy-in and commitment, which is consequently more effective than only asking stakeholders to support implementation Present robust evidence to justify the intervention. This could include using official figures, factsheets, risk assessments and cost-benefit analysis. January,

5 Giving solid arguments for the chosen methodological approach. This could include success stories from other countries/ contexts, testimonies from witnesses and an appraisal of different implementation options, which would show why this one would work best. Using a range of communication channels and tools, based on the needs of the discussion. This means not only using large conferences but also workshops, bilateral meetings, online platforms and more audio-visual materials. Ensure a proper follow-up of the effectiveness of stakeholder involvement (e.g. satisfaction surveys after events are not enough). Country groups then discussed the types of stakeholders they needed to engage to implement UP. Some of the common stakeholder groups are presented below. Table 1. Common stakeholder groupings High power/high interest groups* Ministry of Labour Ministry of Education Regional education authorities Social services authorities PES services Adult education centres VNFIL centres High power/ low interest groups** Chambers of commerce Churches Ministry of Agriculture Ministry of Justice Trade unions/social partners Employer associations Low power groups*** IVET and CVET providers Adult learners NGOs *Higher power/high interest groups are those stakeholders that have the authority to implement new policies and programmes related to UP and a strong interest in supporting low-skilled adults. **Higher power /low interest groups are those that can make policy changes but whose main priorities do not cover supporting low-skilled adults. ***Low power or interest groups are those that have little capability to make changes to the support provided to low-skilled adults and/or do not regard it is a major priority. Key findings from Day 3 Support available through Erasmus The guide to the 2018 Erasmus+ programme 2 had just been published in October Countries can bid for project funding to support UP implementation, based around the programme s three Key Actions: KA1: Adult education staff mobility. This could support UP implementation by providing staff with the opportunity to gain competences in addressing the needs of low-skilled learners. KA2: Developing strategic partnerships. This requires the minimum participation of three countries. Here priority will be given to proposals that: - Improve supply and quality. This could include initiatives that improve and/or extend the supply of high quality tailored provision for low-skilled or lowqualified adults (Step 2) - Facilitate access. This could include provision to facilitate initial learner skills screening (Step 1) or through the validation of skills acquired through informal and non-formal learning (Step 3) - Outreach, guidance and motivation. This could be used for initiatives to increase demand and take up of programmes to engage low-skilled or lowqualified adults in literacy, numeracy and digital skills 2 Available at: January,

6 - Developing staff competence to deliver basic skills, including effective teaching methods for supporting low-skilled or low-qualified adults - Developing mechanisms to monitor the effectiveness of adult learning policies or to track the progress of adult learners. KA3: Policy experimentation. This includes seven priorities, of which the following relate to UP implementation: - Promoting social inclusion and shared values through non formal and informal learning - Implementation of UP for adults without upper secondary education or equivalent - Transnational cooperation activities in the field of education, training and youth. The submission deadline for KA1 projects is 01/02/2018 and for KA2 the deadline is 21/3/2018. For KA3 the deadlines will be published in January Country plans and priorities for after the workshop Following country group discussions, delegates identified the following immediate priorities for actions to be undertaken before the next workshop in April and beyond. Bulgaria delegates will initially aim to mobilise and inform all relevant stakeholders of UP, starting with the Ministry of Labour. They will meet with key stakeholders to set roles and responsibilities and then explore possibilities for using existing ESF operations to support the UP recommendation. Finally, delegates will undertake initial research to map possibilities for implementing UP. Croatia s first step is to obtain Ministerial agreement to follow up on actions; the delegation decided they would then establish a Council for implementing UP of institutions. Concurrently, they will disseminate information on UP through their existing channels, including informing teachers and educators. They will try to tailor existing programmes/policies so they incorporate basic skills and provision for low-skilled adults and they would try to find concrete measures to facilitate access to learning provision, through better outreach but also better tailoring of the provision. An action plan is envisaged. The Italy delegation reported that they have the three UP components but the challenge is to link them together in an organic way. The first step will be to map existing activities and state how they link to corresponding steps of UP via a labelling exercise and then capitalise on them to implement further coordination actions aimed at increasing synergy. Alongside this they will also aim to raise stakeholder awareness of UP. The Greece delegation stated they would go back to their sending organisations to inform them of UP and explore the political will to implement a coherent UP offer. They indicated that they could build on recent initiatives, like a profiling tool that is being deployed through the PES network. Forthcoming research will help them identify target groups. The group will meet next month to discuss provision that can be built on, to support IP, and organisational commitment. Poland delegates will seek to discuss with experts how to shape a tailored learning offer for low-skilled adults. They will continue their work on supporting potential awarding organisations to do validation and modernise skills assessments in this context (e.g. portfolio, simulations instead of classic tests) and in incorporating validation considerations in qualification developments. They will use specific outreach approaches for specific target groups. Alongside this they will also work with folk universities and the ICT association in Poland to explore potential opportunities for implementing flexible pathways and courses on digital skills. January,

7 The Romania delegation reported that their response to the UP Recommendation would be led by the Ministry of Labour and Social Justice, in close partnership with the National Agency for Employment, Ministry of National Education, National Agency for Qualification, and representatives of the training providers. The key agreed actions were initially to scope what changes are required to existing systems (e.g. second chance programmes, diversify education and training offer and facilitate access to training for low qualified adults, profiling methodology for unemployed people, validation centres) to ensure they comply with the requirements of UP. A concept note will propose detailed measures for follow up with a special focus on diversifying the offer for low skilled adults and removing legislative barriers to access education and training programmes. This will be discussed with specific stakeholders, with whom bilateral meetings will be organised before organising larger-scale meetings. Then it will be time to design a proper action plan including dissemination activities. The group will also use opportunities to access ESF and Erasmus+ funding to support implementation. For Spain, the first step will be to mobilise the key stakeholders they need to engage to implement UP. This will initially include engaging with the Ministry of Employment (a representative of which was not present at the workshop). Delegates will also aim to map potential data sources to identify target groups. The main challenge will be in validation, as Spain does not have an established validation authority. January,