F LLL EX FLLLEX: The Impact of LifeLong Learning Strategies on Profession-oriented Higher Education in Europe Project results Margriet de Jong Klaas Vansteenhuyse

F LLL EX −Project goals summary −Update on activities Survey results: −lifelong learners (wp 2) −Employers (wp3) −Lifelong learning providers (wp 4) Self-assessment tool (wp 6+7) −Review experiences and findings Dissemination: publication on FLLLEX results (See Margriet). Contents

F LLL EX FLLLEX goals FLLLEX intended to:  Provide a report on national LifeLong Learning policies  Provide a self-assessment tool on LifeLong Learning for HEI’s  Exchange good practices on LifeLong Learning in professional higher education  Provide policy advice to the European Commission on the structure of LifeLong Learning post 2013 and to involve the LLL policy makers in the project partner countries

F LLL EX FLLLEX partners National Agencies Belgium (Flanders) Finland France Ireland Lithuania The Netherlands United Kingdom (Scotland) Turkey Institutions KHLeuven – Leuven University College Laurea UAS IuT de Saint-Nazaire Letterkenny IoT Vilnius College Hanzehogeschool Clydebank College Yasar University Structural partners Eurashe 3s Banku Augstskola Educonsult Advisory Board Business Europe Education International European Student’s Union Budget: Euro

F LLL EX FLLLEX work packages WP 1, National and European policies for the implementation of LLL (review) IOT (Ireland), Richard Thorn and Ann Stokes WP 2, Survey of expectations of LifeLong Learners WP 3, Survey of expectations of businesses 3S research lab (Austria), Stefan Humpl and Sigrid Nindl WP 4, Survey of the (business) training providers EURASHE, Iva Voldanova and Stefan Delplace

F LLL EX FLLLEX work packages WP 5, Development of a self-assessment tool ENQA (Spain), Josep Griffoll WP 6, Self-assessment of the Higher Education Institutions KHLeuven (Belgium), Irène Hermans WP 7, Review of the self-assesment WoSCop (Scotland), Dugald Craig WP 8, Focus seminar on LLL strategies (dissemination: EURASHE conference) WP 9, Project management

F LLL EX WPActivityPeriod Surveys of LLL students and employers04/2010 – 04/2011 4Survey on LLL providers03/2010 – 10/2010 6Self evaluation in the HEI’s12/2010 – 05/2011 7Review meetings06/2011 – 12/2011 9Preparing pre-conference publication12/2011 – 5/ Project management (administration, finance, other dissemination initiatives) ongoing Update on activities

F LLL EX −Project goals summary −Update on activities Survey results: −lifelong learners (wp 2) −Employers (wp3) −Lifelong learning providers (wp 4) Self-assessment tool (wp 6+7) −Review experiences and findings Dissemination: publication on FLLLEX results (See Margriet). Contents

F LLL EX WP 2: Lifelong learners Main findings –Typology

3s research laboratory, FocusMain TypeSub-typesDescriptionRelation Contents / Tasks Start of programme before / after joining career Education Completing Finishing Working while studying without particular connection of work and education InsignificantBefore Entering Being hired in late phases by an employer in need of graduates Strong, clearly visible relation Before Returning Returning to education and overruling a temporary transition to work InsignificantAfter Transforming General transformation using education as a basis No relationAfter Work Reinforcing Progressing Progressing in the current field by at least one step on the educational ladder Strong, clearly visible relation After (exceptional: before) Adapting Making one step in the current field, in parallel to an existing one not relevant in the field Strong, clearly visible relatioin After Specialising Completing one programme as a specialisation Strong, clearly visible relation After Peaking Completing a formal programme designed for experienced professionals in the field Strong, clearly visible relation After Compensating Compensating the restriction of an existing pathway InsignificantAfter

F LLL EX WP 2: Lifelong learners Main problems: –Low response rate for some countries (skewed results, not possible to compare countries) Freq% Finland55536% Ireland27918% Turkey18512% Lithuania17111% Belgium14910% Scotland695% Netherlands554% France302% Other Country322% Total % –Survey addresses only students who already participate in higher education; hence reasons for non-participation were not investigated –Descriptive report, no concluding statements

F LLL EX −Project summary −Update on activities Survey results: −Lifelong Learners (wp 2) −Employers (wp3) −Lifelong learning providers (wp 4) Self-assessment tool (wp 6+7) −Review experiences and findings Dissemination: publication on FLLLEX results (See Margriet). Contents

F LLL EX WP 3: Survey employers Main problems: –Only 3 partners attained target response of 20 ‘businesses’ Freq% Ireland2424% Netherlands2323% Turkey2020% Lithunia1616% Belgium77% Scotland55% Finland22% France11% Other Country11% Total99100% –Descriptive report, no concluding statements

F LLL EX WP 4: Survey of LLL-providers Main findings: −The landscape of lifelong learning providers is complex and very country-specific. −HEI’s are generally not aware of their competitors or partners in the field −LLL-providers can be categorized in 5 main types:  HEI  Adult centre  Private training provider  Public provider specific group focused  Sectoral organisation

F LLL EX WP 4: Survey of LLL-providers Main problems: −Low response rates for interviews: −Very complex matter to analyse −Time period for preparation and data collection too short (no literature research done before setup) Freq Ireland5 Turkey5 Belgium4 Finland2 Netherlands1 Scotland- France- Lithuania- Total17

F LLL EX WP 7: External review Goal: ‗Reviewing the applicability of the FLLLEX self- assessment tool ‗Review and discuss the results of the self- assessment exercises Method: Review visit to 7 institutions by review panel:  External expert  Peer reviewer from another partner institution  Policy representative from a relevant regional or national body in the host country.

F LLL EX WP 7 External Experts Michal Karpíšek (CZ), Vice–President of EURASHE; Executive Officer at Czech Association of Schools of Higher Education Dr Rob Mark (UK), Director of Lifelong Learning, University of Strathclyde, Scotland Prof. John Storan (UK), Director of Continuum, the Centre for Widening Participation Policy Studies at the University of East London WP7 lead: Dugald Craig (UK), International Development Manager with West of Scotland Colleges’ Partnership

F LLL EX Review findings wp 7: strategy components of LLL HEI’s are incorporating LLL in their strategy by:  Supporting the recognition, accreditation and certification of prior learning  adapting their learning programmes to learning outcomes and credit-based approaches that support part-time, open, project and work-based learning.  Partnership working and collaboration is a natural feature of the operational reality for the majority of the institutions and the remainder are positive about opening their institutions up to this  FLLLEX partners are well aware of the regional,national and European policy drivers and imperatives and extremely receptive to European cooperation and networking

F LLL EX Applicability of the FLLLEX Self-Assessment Tool Method similar and compatible to EFQM-like approaches: fosters appreciation and confidence. Tool stimulates discussion and leads to accurate indication of the organisation’s current situation with regard to the incorporation of LLL Use of focus groups was, generally, perceived as a positive feature. Tool is relatively easy to follow

F LLL EX Suggestions for improvement: Instrument needs to be shortened and simplified Extend functionality from a stocktaking tool to a more organic planning instrument that uses an evaluation of past and current practice to chart a course for the future. Develop briefer and clearer instructions for use  serious consideration should be given to developing an accompanying training course and pack for new and ongoing users. Provide guidance on fitting into existing tools and systems for QA and on added value.

F LLL EX FLLLEX results Achieved the intended outcomes but Reports are descriptive Results are often skewed by low responses Survey addresses only students who already participate in higher education

F LLL EX FLLLEX results: institution List of “Policy hooks” and “Institutional control or Freedom of action” Typology of Lifelong Learners Key elements for participation of Lifelong Learners Contact with employers (information deficit) Contact with LLL providers = institution versus programme? = what about institutional strategy?

F LLL EX FLLLEX results: policy 1. Support the development of coherent and balanced national lifelong strategies to develop flexible and effective education and training systems: Validation of prior learning; European qualification frameworks for Lifelong Learning; Development of teaching and assessment methods in line with the competence approach in all sectors and levels; Capacity-building and ownership of policies by stakeholders including higher education institutions.

F LLL EX FLLLEX results: policy 2. Need for investment in Lifelong Learning 3. Use of policy hooks 4. Support development of partnerships 5. Adapt definition of LLL to clarify communication

F LLL EX Project coordination Klaas Vansteenhuyse Margriet de Jong Leuven University College (KHLeuven) Abdij van Park 9 B-3001 Heverlee