ECTS as tool for recognition Raimonda Markeviciene Minsk October 27,2016

What is quality of mobility? What about keeping the promises? What is quality of mobility? Quality: 1) An essential or distinctive characteristics, property or attribute; 3 )High grade; superiority; excellence. (Webster’s) To establish institutional mindset Recognition Mobility culture: institutional pre-conditions for the possibility for each student and teacher to move between different institutions for the development of mind, attitudes, behavioural patterns as well as institutional mind-set and structures. Institutional commitment to quality principles derived from best practice. Ensure quality of the mobility experience

5 key words before we start mobility activities Diversity Transparency Cooperation Trust Recognition

Recognise diversity as a value and enable to benefit from it DIVERSITY as an institutional mindset Flexible curricula fostering diverse learning paths; Mobility windows; Number of optional credits . Recognise diversity as a value and enable to benefit from it Teach students to value diversity as enrichment, mind-opener, pre-requisite for creativity.

TRANSPARENCY as prerequisite to quality mobility Course Catalogue in two languages Publicly available information on academic offer exchange procedures and requirements Transparent grading and credit information Transparent mobility documents

COOPERATION as commitment and effective communication Establish effective communication channels with partners (academics, administrators) Ensure good knowledge of the academic offer at partner institutions; Accept imbalance of flows (students’ choice and needs).

TRUST and RESPONSIBILITY for the established partnerships Once agreement is signed - do not question their performance Choose partners that: Offer transparent programme descriptions; acceptable profile; c) Programmes are quality assured; d) With complementary or compatible Learning outcomes; Identify semester/year for the mobility Ensure that you understand your partners grading policies

RECOGNITION as a step towards final degree Credits gained during study period abroad and virtual mobility should be automatically transferred and counted towards final degree of the learner .

Basic principles Key features ECTS – learner-centred system LO+ Workload ECTS – learner-centred system Recognition of prior learning; lifelong learning Allocation Credits Accumulation Documents Awarding Transfer Use of credits Key features

Golden rule of Recognition All credits gained during the period of study abroad or during the virtual mobility – as agreed in the Learning Agreement and confirmed by the Transcript of Records – should be transferred without delay and counted towards the student’s degree without any additional work by or assessment of the student. ECTS:

Common institutional framework for recognition “ Study results of a person who has studied at the higher education institution in Lithuania or abroad, either under an external part-time learning agreement, an agreement between ISM or other Lithuanian institution of higher education and foreign higher education institution or under any other legal grounds shall be recognized without any limitations, unless there is evidence of breach of any requirements under the study agreement or any other document specifying the study content.”

Institutional regulations Credit as a tool leading to qualification – every credit counts Accumulation - how many, what credits (type, level) and when Transfer from various study contexts into the study programme Importance of HEI internal regulations for recognition: Recognition of LO at home Without credits Different types of mobility Traceability of mobility in final student documents Regulations for JD?

Know your partner! Act responsibly! Incompatibility of study programmes. What new can we say? Know your partner! Act responsibly! Choice of partners that: provide clear information; Offer programmes of the same levels and keep standards; Offer not exact but also comparable programmes. Mobility period integration: Establish mobility windows in every programme (the most suitable slot for mobility); For the mobility window describe LO that are most easily achieved abroad. Allocation of responsibilities: Appoint academic in each subject area; Make him responsible for approval of students’ programmes abroad; Entrust him to recognize studies on behalf of academic body Work with students: Discuss and approve LA; Provide clear information on recognition rules; After return transfer student’s results to his institutional records.

ECTS Key documents Course catalogue Transcript of records Learning agreement Transcript of records Checklist of compulsory elements Checklist of recommended contents

ECTS - tool for transfer and recognition Information Information package/course catalogue Transcript of records (Before and after mobility; credits, grades) Learning agreement Signed before departure, changed if necessary

General requirements for Course catalogue Available on the web and easily accessible In national language and English Available to students before entering the studies and throughout Detailed and user-friendly information Recommend elements: General information; Resources and services; Information on programmes; Information on educational components;

Learning agreement: general framework Learning agreement – should be seen as a binding document: sending + receiving institutions + student Educational components chosen should not be selected on the basis of equivalence . The Learning outcomes (LO) of the study programme abroad should be compatible with LO of home degree. Agree and Sign Amend/ modify Transfer Responssible Staff & student Responssible staff Signing under academic information depends on institutional culture and traditions. Responssible. Staff and student

LA for study period abroad: Learning agreement ECTS Users’ guide: “Binding commitment between the student, the sending institution, and the receiving institution/organisation/company on all the learning activities to be carried out.” LA for study period abroad: Personal and academic detail of a student; Contacts of the responsible staff at both institutions; Programme abroad; Educational components from which the student will be exempt; signatures Training agreement: Personal and academic detail of a student; Contacts of the responsible staff at both institutions; Type of company, period of training; LO; programme of traineeship and working hours; Level of competence in the workplace languages; Recognition arrangements and signatures Provisions to changes

“…should be provided in transparent, complete and clear way.” Transcript of records ECTS users’ guide: “…provides an up-to-date record of students’ progress in their studies” “…should be provided in transparent, complete and clear way.” Recommended elements: Name and ID of a student; contacts within the institution; Field of study and year of study of the student; Educational components taken; Institutional grading system; grade distribution; date and signature

Bureaucracy or necessity How much bureaucracy is necessary? Bureaucracy or necessity Transcript of records: For transparency – Educational component code and title For quality and quantity of student’s work - credits, local grade and description of grading system For validity and legality - signatures and stamps Learning agreement: For transparency – educational component code and title For quantity of student’s work - credits For validity, legality and binding commitment - signatures and stamps Not seen as binding documents Not transparent

Most common RECOGNITION practices Keep to the Golden rule! Most common RECOGNITION practices Good practice Not recommended Institutional framework Replacing the whole period (e.g. Study period abroad -30 ECTS credits) – Note: ToR of partner institution should become a part of the Diploma Supplement (graduation documents) Translating /transferring course titles of partner institutions and using partner credits Replacing partner course titles and credits with those of the sending institution; Students documents report incorrect data; courses abroad cannot be not traced; transparency principle violated Transparency in students’ learning path; Respect to partners; Credit thinking

Grading scales and cultures in Europe Italy 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 cum laude Belgium 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Netherlands 6 7 8 9 Spain 5,00 - 5,49 5,50 - 5,99 6,00 - 6,49 6,50 - 6,99 7,00 - 7,49 7,50 - 7,99 8,00 - 8,49 8,50 - 8,99 9,00 - 9,49 9,50- 10,0 Norway E D C B A UK 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85-89 90-94 95-100 Germany 5 I am Rita Vienazindiene. I work at the international office of Vilnius University. And today I'm going to talk about the grades. Eeverybody knows what is a grade. It can refer to several meanings in terms of education, but now we will talk about the evaluation of the student's performance. Many grading systems exist all over the world. Each country, or each university has its own grading, and even one university can have not the only one. You may see in the screen some examples. It was always a headake for the university or programme coordinator what to do with the grades their students bring from the university abroad.

Most common grade conversion practices Grades not converted Credits are transferred but grades not converted (Indicated as originally received or not shown at all) Equivalence tables Mostly based on qualitative descriptors, tables drawn at department or institutional level ECTS grading scale (A,B,C..) Used as conversion tool: converted into A, B, C… by host institution and re-converted into home institution. The mechanism of arriving at A, B,C… not clear, in most cases, mechanical.

The ECTS Users’ Guide says: European HEIs have different grading scales and passing grades Mobility students have the right to a fair conversion of the grades they’ve obtained during a period of study abroad Each HEI should produce a grading table for each degree course within a specific subject area (ISCED study field) This will help ensure the transparency of the grading culture and the accurate conversion of grades for mobility students

ECTS Users’ Guide of 2015 - Grade distribution Grading table example Grade distribution tables show how the existing national or institutional scale is being used in the institution – whether in open access or selective systems – and allow for comparison with the statistical distribution of grades in a parallel reference group of another institution. They have to be developed in a standardised format for reference groups of students enrolled in degree programmes belonging to the same field of studies. Calculating the grade distribution tables consists of three steps: Identify the reference groups within your institution by using objective and transparent criteria which should be attached to the grade distribution tables produced. Calculate the absolute number of passing grades awarded to each reference group identified in at least the last two years. Calculate the grade distribution in terms of percentages of the passing grades awarded to the reference group and develop cumulative percentages. An example of a grading table can be seen here.

http://egracons.eu/

EGRACONS Results Descriptions of the different grading cultures and practices in Europe. Descriptions of the grading systems and their application in Europe Internet grade conversion tool EGRACONS collected the information onthe different grading cultures and systems in Europe and created the internet grade conversion tool.

Country Reports EGRACONS Description of existing grading systems in Europe So far 30 countries included See: http://egracons.eu/page/country-reports Egracons project succeded to collect the country reports from 30 European countries which are possible to see now on the website. Visual representation of grading scales in different countries is also available You may see on the screen how this representation looks like - passing grades are on top in green, the failing ones - in the red. Very easy to compare grading systems in the countries.

EGRACONS METHODOLOGY – COMPARING OF CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE(1) EGRACONS CONVERSION TOOL EGRACONS METHODOLOGY – COMPARING OF CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE(1) Passing grades used in institution Number of passing grades awarded to the reference group Percentage of each grade with respect to the total passing grades awarded Cumulative percentage of passing grades awarded 10 50 5% 9 100 10% 15% 8 350 35% 50% 7 300 30% 80% 6 200 20% 100% Total 1000 EGRACONS methodology is based on comparicion of the accummulative percentage. How to get the accommulative percentage? We should prepare the table of three collumns. First cullumn includes all passing grades in certain institution. The best grade is on top. The second column shows how many percents of all the grades this particular grade consists. For example non of the student received 20, which shows 0%. 1,75 % of all the grades are 19 and so on. Thus we calculate number in piercents of all the grades in some particular refferent group. In the third column we calculate the accummulatmive percentage. We start from the top where are the best grades. summarise the percents and go down. Thus go to the far end down and should get 100% in the last line, if not, we should look for a mistake ;) This way the accumulative persent shows how many percents of all the grades are the grade of this line and higher.

Italian institution French institution EGRACONS example based on ECTS Guide’s recommendations and Principles When transferring the grades the grade distribution tables of the sending and receiving institutions should be compared The position of each grade in percentiles within the two tables should be compared, and individual grades converted on the basis of this The receiving institution should decide in advance how they will convert the grades within the overlapping ranges (minimum, average or maximum) Italian institution French institution *Accumulated percentage in red 27 in Italy becomes 12 in France 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 30 lode 6.9% 1.9% 5.7% 2.3% 6.0% 2.7% 11.3% 8.2% 9.0% 11.8% 12.3% 0.5% 15.7% 100* 93,1 91,2 85,5 83,2 77,2 74,5 63,2 55 46 34,2 21,9 21,4 5,7 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 34.79% 18.59% 18.45% 12.05% 9.46% 3.65% 2.30% 0.43% 0.22% 0.06% 0% 100 65,21 46,62 28,17 16,12 6,66 3,01 0,71 0,28 0,06

EGRACONS METHODOLOGY – COMPARING OF CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE (2) EGRACONS CONVERSION TOOL EGRACONS METHODOLOGY – COMPARING OF CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE (2) Italy Lithuania *Accumulated percentage in red 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 30 lode 14,92% 5,41% 8,16% 5,79% 6,56% 7,26% 8,94% 8,22% 8,09% 7,78% 7,38% 1,68% 8,17% 1,64% 100* 85,09 79,67 71,51 65,72 59,16 51,90 42,96 34,74 26,66 18,87 11,49 9,81 1,64 5 6 7 8 9 10 11,71% 13,62% 19,11% 22,54% 19,18% 13,85% 100 88,29 74,68 55,57 33,02 13,85 Let's have a look at the example how the grade conversion works according to the EGRACONS methodology. A French student goes abroad to Italian university and at the end of studies gets the grade 27. 11,8 % of all the grades are 27. Accummulative % if we calculate from the top down is 46. 46 % of all gardes are 27 and higher. The programme coordinator in France checks what grade in France corresponds to the same accummulative percentage. We can see it is approximately 12. So the coordinator converting the student's grade into 12 puts the student to the same statistical goup of the students where he was in Italy.

Aggregation level Subject? Programme? Faculty? University? EGRACONS CONVERSION TOOL Aggregation level Subject? Programme? Faculty? University? Egracons uses ISCED codes of subject areas (Eurostat/OECD/UNESCO) It was not an easy task to decide on what aggregation level the data should be collected. Since the grading culture could differ even in one institution, or in the different faculties and even the subjects. The ideal would be having the grade distribution tables for each subject. But in some cases the data would not be reliable because of the small number of the students in the group. Alternatives are the faculty, university or programme levels.

(International Standard Classification of Education) EGRACONS CONVERSION TOOL ISCED (International Standard Classification of Education) EGRACONS uses ISCED subject area codes which are familiar for all institutions participating in Erasmus, right? The data are collected for all subjects from all the faculties and programmes belonging to one subject area.

EGRACONS CONVERSION TOOL Grade conversion in Egracons Tool (1) Now you may see how the result looks in the EGRACONS tool. We do not need to compare our tables with the ones of partner institution. We jus enter the name of the institution where our student was, suject area, level of studies, the grade and we get this visual representation of the conversion result.

EGRACONS CONVERSION TOOL Grade conversion in Egracons Tool (2) Now you may see how the result looks in the EGRACONS tool. We do not need to compare our tables with the ones of partner institution. We jus enter the name of the institution where our student was, suject area, level of studies, the grade and we get this visual representation of the conversion result.

Procedure EGRACONS CONVERSION TOOL An institution performs a query on their student database for the last 2 or 3 years counting all the grades per degree (with ISCED codes) Enter/copy the grading tables into the Egracons template Upload the grading tables into the tool The tool will compare the grading tables and do the conversions

Thank you for your attention! "In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But in practice, there is." Yogi Berra Thank you for your attention!