TOPMOST: A NEW TOOL BASED ON LEARNING OUTCOMES FOR THE ACADEMIC MOBILITY OF VOCATIONAL STUDENTS Ignacio Ferrer1, Mariamar Cervantes2, Mario Lázaro1 1

2

Technical University of Valencia (SPAIN) Xabec Vocational Training Center, Valencia (SPAIN)

Abstract This paper presents a new tool called TOPMOST for designing, planning and managing the mobility of Vocational Education and Training (VET) students. The database has been created by a partnership of six colleges across Europe with different national qualification frameworks but all focused in industrial maintenance. In order to create a functional database we had to design a procedure to create learning outcomes that are common to the whole partnership and that could be indexed on the database. This procedure, the database and the reports are described in this paper. One of the innovative features of the work is what we call “horizontal vision” which means that the learning outcomes are defined directly by teachers from the competences derived from the qualifications but without considering the qualifications they are embedded on. The procedure shows important advantages: the learning outcomes created are linked directly to competences in the national curricula and mutual trust is enhanced. This leads to the validation and recognition after the mobility period, which is one of the requisites of European Commission in this type of programs. The last part of the paper presents the most useful reports of the TOPMOST tool: The mobility handbook and the mobility matrix. The Mobility Handbook of each school presents the academic offer as well as the time of the year of mobility can be carried out. The Mobility Matrix allows selecting specific learning outcomes in a specific school to carry out punctual student mobility and it generates all the necessary documents according to high quality standards required by the European Credit Vocational Education and Training (ECVET) system. Keywords: ECVET, Competence, Learning outcome, Student mobility, Vocational Training, Industrial Maintenance.

1

INTRODUCTION

Vocational Education and Training (VET) together with personal mobility are considered by the European Commision as the most important policies for ensuring social cohesion in Europe [1]. Since the Lisbon European Council of 2000, the European Commission has strongly promoted the creation of a reference educational framework (metaframework) that helps to compare the qualifications awarded in various countries. Therefore, the European Qualification Framework (EQF) was created in 2009 [1], as a classification of educational levels from initial vocational training to the most advanced doctorate university programs. It can be said that EQF is a translator of qualifications from different countries. Two additional tools were also created for the mobility of students: The European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) for higher education and the European Credit System [2] (ECVET) for vocational education and training. Both tools enable a recognition of the knowledge that a student obtains in different countries or, in the case of VET, by different learning paths (formal, informal, and non-formal). Since the focus of this paper is on the mobility of VET students, only the ECVET tool is considered. The recognition of a qualification, or part of a qualification, between different countries is currently difficult to achieve due to the profound differences between the national vocational qualification (NVQ) systems. The ECVET system is intended to solve this problem by creating a framework that is flexible and general. The focus of the ECVET system is not the recognition of a qualification, but the outcomes of a learning process carried out by an individual in any context (including job, student mobility and formal education). Therefore, the ECVET system is based on learning outcomes that are defined in terms of knowledge, skills, and competences, and these are the minimum units that can be assessed, validated, and recognized. These outcomes are the key for the mobility of VET students and the accumulation of knowledge by individuals. In this paper, a new tool to manage, design and plan the mobility of VET students is presented in the context of the ECVET system. The TOPMOST tool (Tool to Promote Mobility of Students) is based on

Proceedings of INTED2016 Conference 7th-9th March 2016, Valencia, Spain

6342

ISBN: 978-84-608-5617-7

learning outcomes and has been created according to the quality standards proposed in the European recommendations [2] for VET student mobility. TOPMOST is an on-line database of learning outcomes in which several tools have been implemented for the identification of transferable learning outcomes between different countries that can be assessed, validated, and subsequently recognized after the mobility period. The tool has been created during a TOI (Transfer of Innovation) project developed by six VET colleges specialized in industrial maintenance: Xabec Vocational Training Center (Valencia, Spain); Lepido Rocco Vocational Training School (Motta di Livenza, Italy); Markiezaat College (Bergen Op Zoom, The Netherlands); Izmit school (Izmit, Turkey); Dudley College (Dudley, United Kingdom); and HanwerkkamersKoblenz (Koblenz, Germany). These centers will be termed in the paper with the acronyms of XBC, LPD, MKZ, IZM, DDL and HWK, respectively. The creation of learning outcomes is the most important aim of the project. The methodology used for the creation of learning outcomes has been called “horizontal vision”', because the procedure was developed at the lowest level of a qualification curriculum, the competence level, instead of at the qualifications and/or modules level, and in a mutual trust zone created between the teachers (at individual level) instead of at government level. The process consists of each college defining their qualification curricula in terms of competences, and looking for competences that are similar and can be achieved in other colleges during a period of mobility. These competences are called crossnational competences (CNC) to emphasize the fact that they are common to different colleges in different countries. Finally, the learning outcomes are created from the cross-national competences. Since a learning outcome is defined in terms of knowledge, skills, and competences, according to Winterton et al. [3] it can be considered that a learning outcome is a set of competences that are cognitive (knowledge), functional (skills) and social (competences). TOPMOST learning outcomes have been composed by selecting the cross-national cognitive, functional and social competences for the definition of knowledge, skills, and competences. The creation process described above ensures the accomplishment of the quality standard proposed by the ECVET system. The assessment, recognition, and validation procedures of the learning achieved during a mobility period are facilitated because the mobility learning program is designed in terms of competences (according to the local national curricula of the sending and hosting colleges) and re-written in terms of learning outcomes that act as translators between the competences of the sending and hosting college qualifications. Mutual trust is also ensured -a key aspect in the mobility of students- because teachers have shared the learning programs, the methodologies, and the assessment procedures used in their teaching to define the learning outcomes. Several reports have been implemented in the TOPMOST tool for facilitating mobility, but the most important are the mobility handbook and the mobility matrix. The first lists the qualifications available in the tool for a particular school. The second shows the learning outcomes with common competences between the two colleges (sending and hosting) involved in a student mobility period. Moreover, the mobility matrix also shows the period of the year in which a school can offer a learning outcome. This is useful for planning a mobility period. In addition, the mobility documents (the learning agreement and memorandum of understanding) have been implemented in the database. All reports are also accurately described in this paper. In the present paper, the construction of the TOPMOST database is described, emphasizing the approach used for the integration of the different NVQ systems with the ECVET concept of learning outcomes, as well as the process for the identification of cross national competences and the creation of learning outcomes. Finally, the TOPMOST database is described (paying attention to the structure and reports available for organizing student mobility periods). The tool has been already tested in the partnership with satisfactory results.

2

THE BASIS OF THE PROJECT

The main problem when organizing mobility periods is the opacity between the national qualification systems that prevents recognition of the learning achieved during a mobility. This project proposes a method based on competences and learning outcomes known as “horizontal vision”, with the aim of implementing the procedures proposed by the ECVET system for the assessment, recognition, and validation of learning achieved by an individual during a mobility period. In this section, the horizontal vision is presented and the concept of competence is discussed.

6343

2.1

Horizontal vision

The organization of student mobility periods requires trust between the institutions involved, not only for welcoming the student, but especially for the design of the learning content and the procedures for the assessment, validation, and recognition of a mobility period. Therefore, the development of mutual trust zones is necessary for the effective implementation of the ECVET system around Europe. According to Brockman [4], three levels of mutual trust exist: between national governments; between educational institutions; and finally between individuals (teachers and students). Learning outcome-based programs for mobility can be designed with three levels. In the first level between governments- the creation of learning outcomes is achieved by transforming the NVQ systems in learning outcome-based qualifications. In this case, the learning outcomes are defined according to a predefined European qualifications catalogue. This procedure is termed in this paper “vertical procedure”, because the procedure goes from the most general level (qualifications) to the lowest level (learning outcomes). Learning outcomes can also be created at the level of mutual trust between individuals. If a teacher trusts the way in which another teacher teaches (aspects as practices, workshop tasks, and training programs), then learning content for a mobility period can be agreed based on learning outcomes. This procedure of developing learning outcomes is called in this paper “horizontal vision” because it is carried out at the same level, without taking into account the qualifications in which the learning outcome and/or the competence is embedded. It has an important advantage: the learning outcome can be achieved during the mobility period independently of the qualification. The main problem is that the learning achieved cannot be validated and recognized if the educational institution is not involved in the process. Therefore, the organization of mobility periods has to be undertaken at the second level of mutual trust: between institutions. While the creation of the learning outcomes must be agreed between teachers (relaying on individual trust), institutional trust is necessary for agreeing mobility according to quality requirements. Thus, for the effective implementation of the ECVET system, the procedure for the creation of learning outcomes should be “horizontal” because it includes the way in which teachers train in the classroom/workshop and promotes the mutual trust between teachers of different VET providers. This approach means that teachers play an essential role in the creation of learning outcomes that reflects the methodology used in the workshop of the college. Learning outcomes created with this vision are inherently “common” to all the VET providers involved, because the knowledge, skills, and competences have been defined with the agreement of the teachers responsible for the specific learning outcome in each VET provider. This agreement is the aspect that ensures mutual trust and transferability of the learning outcomes. In this paper, mutual trust at the institutional level has been chosen, creating learning outcomes between teachers that use the “horizontal vision”. The final result is a set of learning outcomes that are not linked to a particular qualification, but can be achieved individually during a period of mobility.

2.2

The relation between competence and learning outcome

Vocational Education and Training has been traditionally job-oriented: meaning that the qualification curricula are addressed to define the tasks that a student must achieve for a professional development. Thus, the learning environment is strongly linked with the work context (Bound and Lin [5]). Therefore, the term competence is the most appropriate term for the definition of VET qualifications. In the present section, the meaning of the term competence is analyzed and the qualification structures of the national participants in the TOPMOST project are also analyzed and compared. In the initial period of the project, each college analyzed the different national qualifications systems. As a result of the research, we found that the national VET systems use different concepts for developing the qualification curricula: learning outcomes (United Kingdom according to Mehaut et al. [6] and the ECVET system), core-competences and work processes (The Netherlands according to Sturing et al.[7]), and competences (Germany, Spain, Italy and Turkey). The first agreement was to use the EQF and ECVET European metaframework, so that the results from the project could be easily used throughout Europe and the accumulation of learning could be effectively implemented between the participant colleges. The second agreement was to present the

6344

national curricula in terms of competences. Thus, the competences could be easily used for the creation of learning outcomes (in terms of knowledge, skills, and competences) that are directly linked to competence as cognitive competences (knowledge), functional competences (skills) and social competences (competences and/or attitudes) according to Winterton et al. [3]. The definition of cognitive, functional and social competences are presented in the review achieved by Mulder et al. [8]. Weinert [9] considers that the competence is cognitive when it improves the performance of an individual. Norris [10] assumes that a competence is functional when it is referred to the common abilities that influence on the performance of an individual in a general context, and finally, McClelland [11] defines competence as social when it is based on the behavior in a job placement in the case of VET. The agreements described in the above paragraph enable to work in a very practical way because many of the participant countries have competence-based qualifications (Germany, Spain, Italy and Turkey) and so no effort was required to present the competences of their qualification. This is not the case of The Netherlands and United Kingdom and teachers from these nations had to make an extra effort to transform their official curricula into competence based curricula for the TOPMOST database.

3

CREATION OF LEARNING OUTCOMES

In the current section an accurate description of the procedure for the creation of learning outcomes is presented. The procedure presents the qualifications in terms of competences and then the selection of transferable competences (cross-national competences) is carried out, and finally, the creation of learning outcomes is based on cross-national competences. In addition, the procedure includes assessment, recognition, and validation processes.

3.1

Selection of qualifications and competences

The six colleges participating in the construction of the TOPMOST tool selected a set of their qualifications in which there were students interested in mobility periods (as sending institution) or teachers interested in hosting foreign students. In this way, 37 qualifications were selected. The details (duration, EQF level, minimum student age, etc.) can be found in the TOPMOST website [12]. A general overview of the qualifications shows that all the schools can organize mobility periods in electricity and mechanics, but in the case of automotive, collaboration is only possible between IZM and DDL; in fluid installations between XBC and HWK; and finally, in computing between DDL, LPD, and IZM. The qualification curricula are presented in terms of competences in two approaches. In the first approach, the qualifications are divided into short units or parts that can be compared and understood by all the partners (modules). This approach is straightforward for most of the partners because official curricula of the national qualifications are usually divided into modules. In the second approach, each module is defined in terms of competences. This is the lowest level of a curriculum and enables the transnational portability of the learning achieved during a mobility period. This is the “horizontal” plane that teachers take as a reference for the creation of learning outcomes, as well as for the assessment, validation, and recognition of learning obtained during a mobility period. The qualification curricula presented by the colleges are competence-based with the exception of DDL (which are based on learning outcomes) and MKZ (which are based on core-competences and work processes). Both colleges have made great efforts to transform the official qualification curricula in competence-based curricula. In the case of DDL, the transformation has been carried out by considering the knowledge, skills, and competences of the learning outcomes as individual cognitive, functional and social competences, respectively. The transformation in competence-based qualifications was more difficult in the case of MKZ because its official curriculum has a different structure, so MKZ re-wrote the curricula in terms of competences. The other colleges presented the official curricula without changes according to the database structure: qualifications, modules, and competences. The final result is a set of approximately 1500 competences in the TOPMOST database [12].

3.2

Identification of cross-national competences

An analysis must be made to find competences that are common to colleges in different countries. The procedure for the identification of common competences was carried out in two steps.

6345

In the first step, the competences were classified according to the knowledge and activity referred to in the definition of each competence. The competences were grouped in cells of a matrix composed of knowledge (in rows) and activities (in columns). Once the classification was made, common competences were researched for each cell of the matrix: each cell was then divided into sub-cells of competences that are similar and common to different countries/colleges. These competences are termed cross-national competences (CNC) to emphasize what can be achieved in different countries. A second step of classification is then carried out inside each cell. The aim of the second level of classification was to find CNC in each cell for the creation of learning outcomes, and so CNCs were grouped whenever possible. To become listed as a CNC, a competence must be taught in, at least, two colleges and nations. In Table 1 the number of groups of CNC found in each cell are presented. Each group of CNC is the starting point for the creation of a learning outcome. Note that this number indicates the possibility of period of mobility being available in a specific knowledge and activity. According to Table 1, the knowledge areas in which most mobility periods were possible are: mechanics, electricity, electronics and automation. The list of competences is available in the TOPMOST website [12]. This is the final result of the analysis of the qualification curricula sent by the colleges. The most important part of the project is then carried out: the creation of learning outcomes for the mobility periods. In the next section, the creation process is presented. Table 1. Number of groups of “cross-national competences” (CNC) classified by knowledge and activity. The details of the groups of CNCs are available in the website of TOPMOST www.topmost.es

Drawing

Maintenance

Manufacturing

Measurement

Programming

Quality

Safety

Welding

CM

DS

DR

MT

MF

MS

PR

QL

SF

WD

ATM

Automotive Computer

ATV INF

3

3

1

1

Construction

CNS

Electricity Electronics

ELY ELI

7 2

Engineering Thermal Installations

ENG THI

2

Hydraulic

HDR

1

4

Management Mechanics

MNG MCH

5

7

Plumbing

PLB

1

1

1

Pneumatics Soft Skills

PNM SKL

1

2

1

4

12

4

4 3

3 1 7 10

1

1

5 2

1 2

1

1

1

2

23 17

1

1 1

1 6

2 3

14

2

5

1 4 4

5 46

2

5 4 6

2 35

8

21

14

5

5

5

1 4

4 25

Total

Design

AS

Automation

Total

3.3

Communication

Acronym

Assembly

Acronym

KNOWLEDGE

ACTIVITY

9

6

4

136

Creation process

The learning outcomes are created in this section. The teachers selected a group of cross-national competences that were appropriate for the student mobility periods and then collaborated in creating the learning outcomes from the selected cross-national competences. The process is presented in this section. As a result of the previous analysis, more than 130 groups of cross-national competences were defined (see Table 1). The learning outcomes were created starting from a group of CNCs. The responsible school of each group of CNCs classified the competences in cognitive and functional

6346

competences to define the knowledge and skills of the learning outcomes according to the definition proposed by Winterton et al. [3]. The school also selected a group of competences from the soft skills knowledge row (see Table 1) to define the social (or attitude) competences in the learning outcome (see Fig. 1). Thus, the responsible school proposed a draft of a learning outcome that was discussed by all the teachers of the partnership in Skype meetings. After the discussions, the responsible school included the suggestions agreed by teachers and presented the final version of the learning outcome in terms of knowledge, skills, and competences and these outcomes were then included in the TOPMOST database. In this way, all the teachers discuss and contribute to the creation of learning outcomes, so the outcome is really an agreement between teachers and so becomes a very robust tool for the transnational portability of knowledge. This part of the project was the most interesting because of the active participation of teachers that developed mutual trust and cohesion between partners. More than 70 learning outcomes were created by this method. The final result is available in the TOPMOST website [12] in the common learning outcomes label. The knowledge, skills, and competences for each learning outcome are fully defined. STEP  1 Activity-­‐Knowledge Classification

STEP  2 Identification Cross   National Competences

STEP  3 Creation of   Learning Outcomes

Activity Competence 1 Competence 12

Knowledge

Competence 25 Competence 30

Competence 105 Competence 201

Cross-­‐national Comp.  1 Competence 12 Competence 30 Competence 201 Cross-­‐national Comp.  2 Competence 25 Competence 1235 Not transferable Competence 1 Competence 105

Competence 1235

Learning Outcome 1 Knowledge Competence 12 Skills Competence 30 Competence 201 Competence Soft skills (cross-­‐sectional) Learning Outcome 2 Knowledge Competence 25 Skills Competence 1235 Competence Soft skills (cross-­‐sectional)

Fig 1. The creation process of a learning outcome from the cross-national competences of a group of competences with the same knowledge and activity.

3.4

Assessment, validation, and recognition

The creation of learning outcomes is completed when the assessment, validation, and recognition procedures are defined. An assessment grid was proposed for each learning outcome. This is a guide for making an objective assessment of a learning outcome to help the teacher in charge of hosting a student during the mobility period. Thus, the criteria are the same for all partners, although the teacher can complement the assessment for the specific conditions of a college. In the TOPMOST website [12], the assessment grid of each learning outcome is available. The result of the assessment is “pass/fail”. Once the assessment is made, validation and recognition are easily achieved. Note that each learning outcome was created from a group of “cross-national competences” that, by definition, are taught in the hosting and sending colleges, and by definition, are related to the competences that can be recognized according to the national vocational qualification system of the participant colleges. Thus, the learning outcomes are directly linked with these competences, and, logically, if the assessment of the learning outcome is positive during the mobility in the sending institution, then, the hosting institution can validate the competences related to this learning outcome and recognize the corresponding part of the qualification. The learning outcome translates the competences of the sending and hosting institutions (see Fig. 2). In the TOPMOST database, the links between the competences and the learning outcomes are available for the selected learning outcomes in Annex I of the learning agreement.

6347

SENDING  COLLEGE

TOPMOST LEARNING  OUTCOMES

Comp.  101 Comp.    102

HOSTING  COLLEGE Comp.  201

L.O.1

Comp.  202

Comp.  103

Comp.203

Comp.  104

Comp.  204

knowledge Assessment

skills Competence

Fig. 2 Relations between competences of the corresponding National Vocational Qualification systems of the sending and hosting colleges and Learning Outcomes of the TOPMOST database.

4

TOPMOST TOOL

The main result of the project is the TOPMOST tool, that is a database of learning outcomes (defined according to ECVET requirements) that can be carried out in more than one college of the partnership. Thus, all the learning outcomes presented in the database can be used for organizing mobility periods between the colleges in the partnership. Several applications and reports have been implemented in the database with the aim of facilitating each step of the mobility process: planning (before the mobility period), teaching organization (during the mobility), and finally, validation and recognition (after the mobility). In this section, a description of the application is presented.

4.1

Database structure

The TOPMOST database is a set of learning outcomes that can be achieved in various European colleges and are related to competences that can be validated and recognized in the sending and hosting institutions involved in a student mobility period. Therefore, the database links two kind of data: competences (related to the NVQ of each college) and learning outcomes (defined in this project). The competences represent a simple presentation of the information from each college organized in three levels: college; qualification; and modules. The learning outcomes created in the project are presented according to the knowledge and activity in which they were classified. Note that the learning outcomes created are not a part of a qualification, but are related to groups of cross national competences. For that reason, learning outcomes are independent units that can be assessed individually, validated and recognized by the sending institution according to the link with the crossnational competences defined in the database. Several reports have been implemented in the database for presenting information. Two types of reports can be distinguished: query and mobility. The query reports were designed to show the information (qualifications, modules, and competences) and are related with the information presented in the memorandum of understanding and the list of qualifications offered by each college (called mobility handbook). The mobility reports are designed for the preparation of a VET mobility period: selection of the learning outcomes (called mobility matrix) and the generation of the learning agreement. These reports are described in the following sections.

4.2

The mutual trust: the memorandum of understanding

The memorandum of understanding is an agreement signed between the partners involved in the creation of the learning outcomes. This agreement is based on mutual trust between the participating

6348

institutions. An important added value of the project is that the memorandum of understanding is multilateral rather than bi-lateral. This trust environment is essential for the success of student and/or teacher mobility periods. In this case, mutual trust is inherently ensured by the tool because it was created by those teachers who created the learning outcomes. The memorandum of understanding is available in the TOPMOST website. The memorandum includes a general part with the conditions agreed between the partners for student mobility periods. There is also an annex with a list of qualifications offered by each college and the related learning outcomes. The complete information regarding the national qualifications for each college is available in the database in three reports that show colleges, qualifications, modules, and competences. These reports present a general overview that enables an individual interested in a mobility period to discover the educational offer available from the partnership colleges. The first report is a simple list of the colleges who are members of the partnership; the second report presents a selection list with the colleges and shows the qualifications offered by the selected college for mobility periods. The third report presents two selection list boxes (colleges and qualifications) and shows the modules offered by the college and the qualifications selected; and finally, the fourth report presents three selection list boxes (colleges, qualifications and modules) and shows the competences related to the selection made by the user. Finally, the last report shows a list of learning outcomes related to the knowledge and activity selected in the boxes. The list includes the cross-national competences, qualifications and the college and countries in which the learning outcome can be achieved. The definition of the learning outcomes (knowledge, skill and competence) is shown in the report.

4.3

The selection of learning outcomes: the mobility matrix

The mobility matrix report presents the learning outcomes that are common to the institutions that wish to offer mobility (sending and hosting institution). The user can select both institutions in two selection list boxes and the database then generates a report with all the learning outcomes that are common to the colleges. Furthermore, important information is presented for each learning outcome: the colleges and the period of time in which the learning outcomes can be obtained, and the definition of the learning outcome in terms of knowledge, skills, and competences. In addition, the common learning outcomes are listed alphabetically according to the nomenclature in which the knowledge and activity can be easily identified. The user can select the learning outcomes of interest by clicking in the corresponding check box. A screenshot of the mobility matrix report is shown in Fig. 3 with the example of a learning outcome common to the selected colleges: XBC and HWK. The mobility matrix is the main tool in the TOPMOST database for the organization of mobility periods, because it enables the hosting institution, learning content and study dates to be selected.

4.4

Mobility periods: the learning agreement

The learning agreement has also been implemented in the TOPMOST database. The learning agreement is a document stating the conditions of the mobility period: general data regarding the colleges; hosting conditions of the students; who is the responsible for managing the mobility; and the learning calendar and contents. The learning section of the learning agreement is generated automatically by the database, once the learning outcomes for the mobility have been selected, and is termed Annex I and Annex II. Annex I shows complete information for the selected learning outcomes for the mobility period. For each learning outcome, the knowledge, skills, and competences are shown together with the assessment grid. Annex II shows the list of competences that the student achieves in the hosting institution during the mobility period and also the competences that can be subsequently validated and recognized by the sending institution. In both cases, the national qualification that includes the competences is also shown. This document is the basis for the effective assessment, validation, and recognition of the mobility period and ensures quality levels according to the requirements of ECVET [13].

6349

Selection boxes f or sending and hosting institutions

Mobility reports

Check box

Shaded Box: Available months f or the mobility of the selected LO

Learning outcomes def ined in terms of Knowledge, Skills and Competences

Fig. 3 Screenshot of the TOPMOST database: mobility matrix report for the selected colleges (XBC and HWK) that includes: the definition of the learning outcome; and the calendar in which the colleges offer the learning outcome.

4.5

Mobility handbook

The mobility handbook is prepared by each school with the key information for the student and the sending institution. The mobility handbook has three sections: general information, national vocational qualification systems, and learning outcomes list. In the first section, the general information of the city and the college is described. The linguistic requirements, a brief description of the VET system, and the cultural offer of the city are introduced. Finally, the requirements for the internships are presented because the regulations in each country differ greatly. In the second section the information related with the assessment, validation, and recognition is described. The mobility handbook also contains the information about the awarding body, examinations, pass requirements, and grading scale. Finally, the mobility matrix of the college is presented.

5

CONCLUSION

This paper presents the TOPMOST tool for the mobility of VET students. A procedure for the creation of learning outcomes according to the ECVET system was proposed in the context of a partnership where mutual trust is ensured between institutions and between teachers. The first step was to present all the qualifications in terms of competences in order to make comparisons. The competences were then classified by knowledge and activity and the competences achievable in more than one college were identified and grouped. These types of competences are termed cross-national competences and are used for the definition of knowledge, skills, and competences of the learning outcomes, considering the competences as cognitive, ability, and/or attitude competences. This procedure has an important advantage, because it enables linking the defined learning outcomes according to the ECVET system with the competences in the sending institution thereby facilitating validation and recognition. Information regarding the competences and learning outcomes has been included in a database in which several reports were designed for organizing a mobility period according to the standards required by the European Commission. The memorandum of

6350

understanding shows information regarding the qualifications offered by the partners (qualifications, modules, and competences) and the learning outcomes created during the project and the associated competences. The mobility matrix shows the learning outcomes that are common to more than one college and the period of time in which they can be achieved. A learning agreement shows the competences that can be validated and recognized for the selected learning outcomes in a mobility period, as well as the assessment grid. Finally, the mobility handbook is a report that shows the relevant information (educational and cultural) for college students interested in mobility periods. The tool was made by colleges specialized in industrial maintenance, but the procedure for creating learning outcomes can be applied in other knowledge areas.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors wish to thank the teachers who have contributed to the creation of the TOPMOST tool. We wish to specially thank Rene Strijbors, from the Maintenance Educational Consortium (The Netherlands), who oriented the project and Antonio Mir, the principal at Xabec, for his contribution to the creation of a trusting environment in the partnership. Finally, the authors acknowledge the UE for the financial support given to the TOPMOST TOI Project (grant 2012-1-ES1-LEO0S-49316) and to the Technical University of Valencia for the support received from library services.

REFERENCES [1]

Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on the establishment of the European qualifications framework for lifelong learning. European Parliament Official Journal C 111, 6.5.2008, 2008.

[2]

Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2009 on the establishment of a European Credit System for Vocational Education and Training (ECVET). European Parliament Official Journal C 155 of 8.7.2009, 2009.

[3]

Winterton, J., Delamare-Le Deist, F. and Stringfellow, E. (2005) Typology of knowledge, skills and competences: clarification of the concept and prototype. Technical report, CEDEFOP.

[4]

Brockmann, M., Clarke, L. and Winch, C. (2009). Difficulties in recognizing vocational skills and qualifications across Europe. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 16(1):97–109.

[5]

Bound, H. and Lin, M. (2013). Developing competence at work. Vocations and Learning, 6(3):403–420.

[6]

Mehaut, P., Brockmann, M., Clarke, L. and Winch, C. (2008). Competence-based vocational education and training (VET): the cases of England and France in a European perspective. Vocations and learning, 1(3):227–244.

[7]

Sturing, L., Biemans, H.J.A., Mulder, M. and De Bruijn, E. (2011). The nature of study programmes in vocational education: Evaluation of the model for comprehensive competencebased vocational education in The Netherlands. Vocations and Learning, 4(3):191–210.

[8]

Mulder, M., Weigel, T. and Collins, K. (2007). The concept of competence in the development of vocational education and training in selected EU member states: a critical analysis. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 59(1):67–88.

[9]

Weinert, F.E. (2001). Defining and selecting key competencies, chapter Concept of competence: a conceptual clarification. Göttingen, Hogrefe.

[10]

Norris, N. (1991). The trouble with competence. Cambridge Journal of Education, 21(3):331– 334.

[11]

McClelland, D.C. (1998) Identifying competencies with behavioral-event interviews. Psychological Science, 9(5):331–339.

[12]

Topmost: A tool to promote mobility of students. website: www.topmost.es, June 2014.

[13]

Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2009 on the establishment of a European quality assurance reference framework for vocational education and training. European Parliament Official Journal C 155 of 8.7.2009, pages 1–10, 2009.

6351