Raimonda Markeviciene, Minsk, 27 October, 2016 Diploma Supplement Raimonda Markeviciene, Minsk, 27 October, 2016

WHY Diploma Supplement? Transparency &change Mobility Recognition Diploma mills Proliferation of new qualifications Non-recognition Poor evaluation of qualifications Rapid change of HE systems and structures Lack of sufficient information

Founding principles of DS Respects national and international academic authority Can be adapted to national needs Aids resolution of international recognition problems Aids recognition for academic and professional purposes Excludes value-judgement in respect to equivalence Aids/accompanies original credentials

DS - Information template jointly developed by the European Commission, the Council of Europe and UNESCO/CEPES Over 70 different institutions (HEIs, ENIC/NARICs, social partners, and employers). 25 different subject fields 250 separate evaluation of actual Supplements 1997 -Lisbon Recognition Convention 1998 – Sorbone Declaration 1999 – Bologna declaration September 1997-June 1998 – international working group developed pilot tested DS model

DS is a direct product of the Council of Europe/UNESCO “Convention on the Recognition of Qualification Concerning Higher Education in the European Region” adopted in Lisbon 1977, which: Acts Gives transparency Describes Accompanies original qualification Not valid without Diploma/award certificate Provides sufficient independent data on qualification Improves recognition nature, level context, content and status of the studies pursued.

Recommendations Follow a common structure. Accompany the original qualification. Have key information in the original language of the institution. Are free from value judgments. Are centrally produced by institutions. Contain information on the local HE system. Are issued automatically. Are translated accurately. Are linked to quality assurance system. Are evaluated with sensitivity.

Issued automatically, free of charge To be used for any qualification, area and at any institution Advisable to use ECTS information, consistency in terminology Issued in a national and widely spoken European language Further recommendations

Political and operational support Bologna (1999): adoption of a system of easily readable and comparable degrees, also through the implementation of Diploma supplement, in order to promote European citizens employability and the international competitiveness… Berlin (2003): …every student graduating as from 2005 should receive the Diploma Supplement automatically and free of charge. It should be issued in a widely spoken European language. (2003) Diploma Supplement labels (since 2003)

For students For institutions Benefits Easily understandable and comparable diploma Objective description of academic achievements Easier access to job or employment opportunities For students Increases transparency of qualifications Saves time Facilitates recognition Raises institutional visibility, helps marketing Promotes employability of graduates For institutions

Pros and cons to the implementation ways DS label Provides unified approach Might help to reduce initial costs Mistakes more difficult to correct National Initiative Institutional initiative Easier to correct structural mistakes and to find cost effective solutions

Information sections and sub-sections 1.1 Family name 1.2 Given name 1.3 Date of birth 1.4 Student identification number or code 2.1 Name of qualification and title conferred 2.2 Main field of study for the qualification 2.3 Name and status of awarding institution 2.4 Name and status of institution administering studies 2.5 Language of instruction/examination 3.1 Level of qualification 3.2 Official length of programme 3.3 Access requirements 1. Information identifying the holder of the qualification Original language 2. Information identifying the qualification Accreditation and profile 3. Information on the level of the qualification Relate to NQF where possible, use Bologna terms

Information sections and sub-sections 4.1 Mode of study 4.2 Programme requirements 4.3 Programme details 4.4 Grading scheme and, if available, grade distribution guidance 4.5 Overall classification of the qualification 5.1 Access to further study 5.2 Professional status 6.1 Additional information 6.2 Further information sources 4. Information on the contents and results gained Learning outcomes Transcript of records Do not leave empty 5. Information on the function of qualification Allows very personalized information. Be careful with internet references! 6. Additional information

Information sections and sub-sections Date/Signature/Capacity/Official stamp or seal Information up to date, developed centrally, HE system diagram and comments provided where possible NQF described 7. Certification of the Supplement 8. Information on the Higher Education System

Diploma Supplement and Joint Degrees Name of qualification and title conferred (in original) Is the title protected by law Indicate if it is a JD Name and status of awarding institution Names of institutions issuing degree whether they undergone quality assurance and/or accreditation procedure Name and status of institution if different from 2.3 administering studies The section should contain detailed information depending on JP model and mobility scheme used in it Mode of study How programme was undertaken: full-time, e-learning which partners), placements … Programme details/ grading scheme What parts of the qualification have been earned at which institution Information on all grading schemes used should be provided Additional information Note whether qualification is a joint or double/multiple degree Consortium agreement and arrangements for QA might be referred to Information on the national HE system References to the HE systems whose institutions are involved in JP provision 2.1 2.3 2.4 4.1 4.3; 4.4 6.1 8

Maintaining DS requirements, improving information Monitoring DS Ability to provide Personalized information Preserving structure Reaction to changing milieu (Part8) Retaining requirements of issuing DS (automatic Free, to all) Alumni and feedbacks on recognition Quality of information Ability to provide personalised information – not cared for at the moment, therefore only a few institutions bother to provide it. (even courses taken abroad) Preserving structure – the label requirement Reaction to changing milieu (part 8) – may not always depend on us. Could be, and in most countries is a national requirement, especially in the cases where DS decisions were taken by the ministry Retaining requirements – among the label requirements, but institutional decisions might be strange Alumni – be attentive whether some of the DS information has to be clarified Maintaining DS requirements, improving information

Problems as found in DS label applications: Problems as found by Bologna process implementation report 2012: DS issued automatically only in 25 countries. In other 22 issues upon request Some HE systems charge for the DS Only 7 countries monitor the use of DS by employers (issue of awareness) Descriptions of HE systems in part 8 are not exhaustive Less than half checked countries’ DS s show QA status of the institution ??? Only 1/3 of the DSs show the necessary access qualification Learning outcomes are either not mentioned or underdeveloped. Problems as found in DS label applications: The DS does not follow official model Changed or missing preamble No proofs that DS is issued to ALL students and Free of charge The courses taken abroad are not indicated with the original titles (not traceable) Not clear what credits are used Confusing translation of degree titles

Stage of implementation of the Diploma Supplement, 2010/11 Every graduate receives a DS in the EU/CoE/UNESCO format in a widely spoken European language, automatically & free of charge issued to every graduate upon request & free of charge issued to some graduates OR in some programmes free of charge issued to some graduates OR in some programmes for a fee In many cases, Diploma Supplements do not provide the expected information. Wider dissemination of the explanatory notes & training of staff needed. Source: BFUG questionnaire, 2011

Diploma Supplement revision 2015-2018 Not all countries issue DS automatically Learning outcomes are not included or well defined intended purpose is not clear Language used is not clear Format is not flexible DS label should continue Need for digitization Conclusions of BFUG secretariat (2012-2015 working group):

General guidelines Remember Explanatory note/preamble should be kept Recommended structure should be preserved Name and status of the institution and classification of the award should be presented in original language Issued centrally at the institution Measures to prevent forgery Section 8 – max 2 pages and describe HE system at the time of award of qualification Careful translations Quality assurance systems indicated Remember DS has no legal validity or guarantee the status of the institution, award, or recognition as part of the national higher education system