Meeting of the Norwegian Rectors’ Conference Board

Qualifications frameworks and the Bologna process Riga, 23-24 March, 2006

Prof. Andrejs Rauhvargers (Latvia)

What is a qualifications framework?

Previous practice how higher education qualifications are described is

listing the: • admission requirements, • duration of programme (later workload in credits), • study contents, i.e. lists of courses but almost nothing has been said about learning outcomes: competencies, skills, etc.

As a result: • Even the level of qualification is sometimes unclear, • In binary systems each subsystem may have different and incompatible qualification levels • It is not clear what the graduate “can do” • It is difficult to make international comparisons needed for recognition

New style qualifications frameworks should describe qualifications in terms of:

• level, • workload, • learning outcomes • profile Elaboration of national frameworks and an overarching framework for the whole EHEA is requested by the Berlin ministerial communiqué

National qualifications framework is the single description, in which all qualifications are described through through learning outcomes and which shows how the qualifications in the national national system are related to each other.

If qualifications are described in in terms of learning outcomes • growing transparency & international comparability, • It is much easier to understand the function of the qualification, • recognition can be focused on these learning outcomes which are relevant to the purpose for for which recognition is sought,

If qualifications are described in in terms of learning outcomes Additional benefits • More clarity to employers • More clarity to students, • Tool for curriculum development • Defining learning outcomes of each module helps – creating LLL paths – Use of modules for learners from outside

Report of the European Framework group

direct link: http://www.aic.lv/ace/ace_disk/Bologna/Bol_semin/Copenh/Copenh2005/EQFreport.pdf

The framework for qualifications of the European Higher Education Area

• EHEA framework is an overarching framework with a high level of generality, consisting of three three main cycles, with additional provision for a for a short cycle within the first cycle. • EHEA framework includes cycle descriptors in the form of generic qualification descriptors to be to be used as reference points (the Dublin descriptors). • Descriptors offer generic statements of typical typical expectations of achievements at the end end of each Bologna cycle.

Guidelines for credit ranges in the EHEA framework

• first cycle qualifications: 180 – 240 ECTS credits; • short cycle higher education qualifications within within the first cycle: typically approx. 120 ECTS credits • second cycle qualifications, typically 90 – 120 ECTS credits with a minimum of 60 credits at the the level of the second cycle; • third cycle (higher education) qualifications.

Relations between the overarching framework or the EHEA and the national frameworks

being more general, EHEA framework should be be capable to accommodate the national QFs and QFs and help interpretation of qualifications between them • EHEA framework does not use profile • EHEA framework consists of three main cycles, with additional provision for a short cycle. • EHEA framework includes cycle descriptors that that can be used as reference points.

Descriptions of qualifications in the National qualifications frameworks NQF are more specific than the EHEA framework cycle descriptors NQF compared to EHEA framework may, e.g. • include profile • have two parallel sets of generic qualifications • Use levels of credits • NQFs interpret qualifications in the setting of national HE (and employment) system

180-240 ECTS

First cycle

90-120 ECTS

3-4 years (?)

II nd Third cycle cycle

Steps in creating qualifications frameworks European level cycle descriptors for the European overarching framework (Dublin descriptors) National level general learning outcomes for the generic qualifications in the national frameworks Inter-institutional level (not necessarily) subject – specific LO of qualifications along subject fields Institution/programme level – specific LO of the particular qualification – specific LO of each programme component

First cycle graduates: (Dublin descriptor) • demonstrate knowledge and understanding – that builds upon general secondary ed., – is supported by advanced textbooks, – but some aspects of knowledge are at the forefront of the study field;

• can apply their knowledge & understanding in a a professional manner in their work, • are able to devise and sustain arguments and solve problems within their field of study;

Dublin descriptor for the first cycle (contd.) have the ability • to gather and interpret relevant data • to inform judgments that include reflection on relevant social, scientific or ethical issues; have learning skills • to continue to undertake further study with a high degree of autonomy.

Learning outcomes for modules BSc programme in Physics (A)At the end of the module, the learner is expected to be able to perform correctly calculations on wave functions and in the solution of the Schrödinger equation for a range of one-dimensional problems. Example taken from presentation of Jennifer Moon at Glasgow conference

Learning outcomes for modules (B) At the end of the module the learner is expected to be able to describe and explain the function of the basic devices of optoelectronics; optical fibres; liquid crystal displays; bi-polar and surface field effect transistors and MOS light emitting diodes. Example taken from presentation of Jennifer Moon at Glasgow conference

Learning outcomes for modules A module in B.Ed programme At the end of the module the learner is expected to be able to • explain the more common reasons for difficult behaviour in primary school children in class situations, indicating standard techniques for ameliorating that behaviour. • or - within the context of a class situation, demonstrate and evaluate the use of appropriate examples of positive reinforcement for the purpose of the improvement of behaviour. Example taken from presentation of Jennifer Moon at Glasgow conference

What benefit from each grade of LO detail? Cycle descriptors for the European overarching framework (Dublin descriptors) : help interpreting qualification levels among national QFs National level: general learning outcomes for the generic qualifications in the national frameworks clarify the role of the (generic) qualification in the national system, internationally may be sufficient for “level recognition” Study field level (inter-institutional) – subject specific LO of qualifications in each subject field – more useful for ensuring consistency in the national system; LO usually will have more details at programme level

What benefit from each grade of LO detail? (II) Institution/programme level • detailed LO of the particular qualification indispensable at recognition of individual qualification – for both academic and professional purposes • detailed LO of each programme component (course, module, placement, dissertation, etc.) a) helps credit transfer b) helps assigning credits for prior/experiential learning, promotes LLL c) helps assessing informal learning, possibly transnational qualifications – on condition that there is a proof that stipulated learning outcomes have been achieved

Role for quality assurance • QA builds trust among the educational systems, • QA should approve that the stipulated learning outcomes are in reality acquired – i.e. QA is involved at inclusion of each individual qualification into national qualifications framework • QA is used to link qualifications to the national qualifications framework

Linking national frameworks to European overarching framework

Criteria and procedures for verifying the compatibility of national frameworks to EHEA framework • clear link between the qualifications in NQF and and the cycle descriptors of the EHEA framework • NQF and its qualifications are based on learning outcomes • qualifications are linked to ECTS • transparent procedures for inclusion of qualifications in the NQF with involvement of national QA system • NQF and its alignment with EHEA framework is referenced in all Diploma Supplements

The following procedures are proposed for for self-certification of compatibility:

• competent national body/bodies shall self-certify the compatibility of the NQF with the the European framework • self-certification process shall include agreement of agreement of the quality assurance bodies of the the country in question recognised through the Bologna process • self-certification process shall involve international international experts • self-certification and the evidence supporting it it shall be published and shall address separately each of the criteria

Overarching qualifications freamework framework for EHEA vs. the EQF of the European Commission

EHEA framework and the EQF are they antagonistic? • EHEA framework and the EQF are different but not incompatible. • EQF levels 6, 7 and 8 correspond to the Bologna I, II and III cycles • EQF level 5 in principle corresponds to shortcycle qualification • Difference: some qualifications linked through national frameworks to EQF levels 6, 7 and 8 would not necessarily be in NQF for HE

EHEA I st cycle and Level 6 EQF

EHEA I st cycle and Level 6 EQF (2)

EHEA II nd cycle and Level 7 EQF

EHEA II nd cycle and Level 7 EQF (2)

EHEA III rd cycle and Level 8 EQF

EHEA III rd cycle and Level 8 EQF (2)

QFs and Bologna Stocktaking

Steps in creating national QFs (1)

1. Decision to start work at NQF, 2. Locating national qualifications in Bologna cycles, cycles, clarifying the issue of profile 3. Formulating level descriptors for the generic qualifications in each cycle 4. National discussion and approval of level structure structure and descriptors of generic qualifications qualifications 5. Embedding the national QF in the national legislation

Steps in creating national QFs (2) 6. Formulating national understanding of qualifications along broad subject lines 7. Making individual study programmes outcomesoutcomes-based 8. Amending national QA system for inclusion of qualifications into NQF 9. Including national qualifications into NQF through a through a transparent procedure 10. Aligning NQF to the overarching EHEA framework framework

Are the existing transparency tools Diploma Supplement and ECTS fit for reflecting learning outcomes and qualifications frameworks?

ECTS Key features (version autumn 2004)

• Credit is a way of quantifying the learning outcomes. • LO are sets of competences, expressing what the student will know, understand or be able to do after completion of a process of learning. • Credits can only be obtained after completion of the work required and assessment of the learning outcomes achieved. • Credits are allocated to all educational components of a of a study programme (such as modules, courses, placements, dissertation work, etc.) and reflect the quantity of work each component requires

Diploma Supplement (I)

4.2 Programme requirements 4.2 Include details of any particular features that help define the qualification, especially information on the requirements for successfully passing it. If available, provide details of the learning outcomes, skills, competencies and stated aims and objectives associated with the qualification.

Diploma Supplement (II) 6.1 Add any additional information not included included above but relevant to the purposes purposes of assessing the nature, level and usage of the qualification. 8 INFORMATION ON THE NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM Give information on the higher educational system: its general access requirements; types of institution and the STRUCTURE. This description should a context for the qualification and refer to it.

In the Bergen ministerial conference ministers: • Endorsed the European overarching framework, • agreed to start work at national frameworks before 2007 • agreed that all countries should have national frameworks in place by 2010

Challenges • There is a risk that not all countries will introduce outcomes–based qualifications frameworks – or at least some may be slow, • Qualifications frameworks may be introduced superficially: – just formulating the national-level descriptors – or working without involvement of all the stakeholders • Outcomes - based curriculum development is new to many European countries/institutions/ academic staff – training and consultations are needed

How far has Latvia progressed in elaborating qualifications frameworks?

General issues • working group was established in October 2004, • The level of Latvian qualifications in the Bologna 3-cycle system has been clarified, • The issue of “academic” and “professional” bachelor and master degrees has been discussed • Known examples of qualifications frameworks: Irish, UK(E,W,NI), Scottish and Danish have been discussed • Danish model has been chosen as a prototype prototype

Underlying principles • While striving for unitary HE system in Latvia, a more professional and a more academic profile of degrees will be kept, • academic profile degrees should include competencies competencies that ensure employability using transversal skills and knowledge in the academic field • professional profile degrees should include competencies that ensure ability of holders to research research and innovation • In any profile or level competencies should include skills for further learning and self-development to ensure sustainable employability over the whole life • the competencies should address work and science ethics

Working group methodology 1. Description of the generic qualifications is based on: • profile • three groups of competencies: – intellectual – academic and professional, – practical • formal issues: access requirements and further study/ work options

Working group methodology (II) 2. Formulating of competencies was • as much as possible based on wording of existing legal texts: – Academic education standard (Cabinet regulation) – Professional HE Standard (Cabinet regulation) but re-shaped and adapted according to the recent developments • Where there was no appropriate wording in the legal texts, the wording was formulated, adapting wording of of Dublin descriptors and Danish QF to Latvian

Progress Descriptions have been created for • Short-cycle (college) higher education • Bachelor (academic and professional profile) • Master (academic and professional profile) • Doctor They have been discussed at national level in 2005 Next steps: • Giving the descriptors a legal status, • Starting work at inter-institutional and programme level