Designing and implementing of the NQF in RM 2nd seminar, Linköping University, 7-9 October 2009 Presentation by Elizabeta Bahtovska & Zamir Dika

compatible Designing the National Framework for HE Qualifications in Republic of Macedonia based on the ‘Overarching framework for qualifications in the EHEA’ 1 (NQF), compatible with the European Qualification Framework for Lifelong Learning 2 (EQF). - Tough Job The Framework

Methodology The process for the design of the National Qualification Framework for Higher Education Qualifications in Republic of Macedonia will follow the TEN STEPS recommendation 1 as an outcome of the BFUG Working Group on QF Report, submitted to the conference of the Bologna Process in London, 2007 by the NQF Development and Certification Report from Bologna Working Group on QF

Ten Step Process FIRST STEP Decision to start: Taken by the national body responsible for higher education – minister. SECOND STEP Setting the agenda: The purpose of our NQF. THIRD STEP Organizing the process: Identifying stakeholders; FOURTH STEP Design Profile: Level structure, Level descriptors (learning outcomes), Credit ranges. FIFTH STEP Consultation National discussion and acceptance of design by stakeholders SIXTH STEP Approval According to national tradition by Minister/Government/legislation SEVENTH STEP Administrative set-up Division of tasks of implementation between HEI, QAA and other bodies STEP EIGHT Implementation at institutional/programme level; Reformulation of individual study programmes to learning outcome based approach. STEP NINE Inclusion of qualifications in the NQF; Accreditation or similar (cfr. Berlin Communiqué) LAST STEP Self-certification of compatibility with the EHEA framework (Alignment to Bologna cycles etc.); Activities (almost) done Activities partially done Activities undertaken – on the way

FIRST STEP Decision to start. Taken by the national body responsible for higher education – minister: –Law on Higher Education, article 99: Government of R. Macedonia should adopt NQF on the proposal by the Minister; –Declaration by the Minister of Education on 2008 for harmonization with the EU legislation, part for NQF; –TEMPUS Structural measure on NQF ; Question: Are they enough?

SECOND STEP Setting the agenda: The purpose of our NQF. –TEMPUS Project “Designing NQF”: Based on the EHEA NQF compatible with EQF for LLL for the HE cycles of studies – end of 2011; –EU CARDS Project “Technical Assistance to the Ministry of Education and Science on lifelong learning ” – ends February EQF as a Framework. The same question: Are they enough? – Not yet identified-agreed the national agreed set of purpose for NQF;

THIRD STEP Organizing the process: Identifying stakeholders. –For the CARDS Project, stakeholders identified; –For the TEMPUS Project, stakeholders are in the process of identification;

FOURTH STEP Design Profile: Level structure, Level descriptors (learning outcomes), Credit ranges. –The process: Choosing Approach: Data Collection and Analysis; Designing the Level Structure and Credit Ranges; Level/Dublin Descriptors – Comparative Analysis;

Step 4 The Approach Down To Top Approach: –The HE Institutions as a ‘designers’ of the NQF profile (Fourth step); From the Project Team (TEMPUS) provided the TEMPLATE for needed informations:

Step 4 Data Collection and Analysis Data gathered from all accredited HE Institutions, identified by the Accreditation Board. Relevant data to design the profile of QF was analyzed, as follows: –Cycles of studies (ECTS credits, ‘type of the cycle); –Field of Qualifications issued; –Profile of the Diploma-qualifications; –Type of studies;

From the Data Analysis it was concluded: –ALL the HE Institutions have organized studies according the “Bologna” Levels/Cycles of studies; –The range of ECTS varies as: Step 4 Level Structures and Credits First CycleSecond CycleThird Cycle Level StructureBachelorMasterDoctor Credit Range180 ECTS and 240 ECTS 60 ECTS, 90 ECTS, 120 ECTS Not yet accredited programs

Step 4 Descriptors – Comparative Analysis For the preparation of Level-Dublin descriptors, since there the complementarity of Bologna Framework and EQF for LLL foreseen, the Comparative Analysis was conducted. Analyzed QF EHEA and German Model of QF. Swedish and Flemish model was analyzed in terms of compliance with the QF.

Step 4 Comparative Analysis – In depth QF EHEAGerman Model Flemish Model Swedish Model Our Model Qualificati on Cycle Description of Cycles. Ex. First Cycle: Bachelor Level; Second Cycle: Master Level; Third Cycle: Doctorate Level Outcomes (DD) DD by QF EHEA: K&U; Applying K&U; Making Judgments; Communication Skills; Learning skills; German Model – German DD; Swedish and Flemish Model – EQF descriptors; Outcome: Scheme of complementarity. Degrees and ECTS Description of the time-length of the cycles, credits accumulation and entrance requirements

Step 4 Comparison – An Example

Completing Step 4 The Top to Down Approach: –Designing Outcomes and assigning to the Qualifications; –Framing the Framework; –Setting the implementation aspects; –Training and preparation for the Fifth Step: Consultation National discussion and acceptance of design by stakeholders