1. Connections between the recognition of non-formal and informal learning and National Qualification Frameworks - consequences for VET
Dr. Silvia Annen
Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training, Germany
Apprenticeship in a Globalised World:
Premises, Promises and Pitfalls
Johannesburg, South Africa
Dr. Silvia Annen, Section 4.2

2. Dr. Silvia Annen, Section 4.2
Overview
Methodology and theoretical basis
Research question
Typology of recognition approaches
Results of the analysis of selected approaches (EVC, NVQs, Realkompetanse, VAE)
Aims and institutional arrangement of recognition approaches
Connections between recognition approaches and NQFs
Final remarks and recommendations
Dr. Silvia Annen, Section 4.2

3. Methodological Design
Literature research
Analysis of documents (e.g. handbooks, guidelines, quality assurance material, compendia and laws)
24 Interviews acording to a manual:
Important key persons (played decisive role in the development or the implementation of the approach)
Validation of the results of the above analyses
Ascertainment of the practical experiences with the approaches
Criteria-based comparison of the approaches
Dr. Silvia Annen, Section 4.2

4. Criteria for the analysis
Pedagogical dimension
Methodology
Understanding of competences
Institutional and political dimension
Stakeholders
Norms und standards
Rights of disposal
Coordination
Origin
Objectives
Dr. Silvia Annen, Section 4.2

5. Overview and Systematization of the process of recognition
Silvia Annen, Section 4.2

6. Typology of Recognition Approaches
Type „Integration“
Type „Autonomy“
Type „Secondation“
Obtainment of certificates/qualifications of the formal educational system
Obtainment of certificates without any equivalence in the formal educational system, limited entitlements
No or limited obtainment of certificates or direct entitlements within the formal educational system
Formal
Non-formal
Informal
Summative and formative
Summative
Formative
Assessment of equivalences
Tests, performance measurements
Competence balances, Portfolios
Norm-orientated
Criteria-orientated
Individual-orientated
Silvia Annen, Section 4.2

7. Research Question
It is statable that in connection with the development of NQFs a couple of typologies with relevance for the recognition of non-formal and informal learning were developed (e.g. Schneeberger/Schlögl/Neubauer 2009)
In the context of the above study it became apparent that there are especially connections between approaches belonging to the type ‘Integration’ and NQFs
NQFs are an important reference point for the formal recognition of competences
Central question: How are integrative approaches towards recognition and NQFs conceptually and practically connected and what does their design mean for VET?
Silvia Annen, Section 4.2

8. Methodological design of the approaches
Silvia Annen, Section 4.2

9. Institutional design of the approaches
Silvia Annen, Section 4.2

10. Aims and institutional arrangement of recognition approaches
All analysed approaches towards recognition pursue three goals:
Advancement of lifelong learning
Facilitation of the individuals’ employability
Formal qualification of the individuals
Norway and Netherlands: regarding advancement of lifelong learning very positive because of facilitating wide scope of possible standards as reference points for recognition (corresponding with broad concept regarding recognition of competences)
England and France: have further developed their NQFs
Concept of lifelong learning supported by all approaches because of individual right to use - in France and Norway even anchored within formal law
The summative orientation eases certification and formal recognition.
The third party assessment is also necessary because of the objective to lead to formal recognition. But the methods of the third party assessment within the approaches are more oriented towards non-formal and informal learning like portfolio assessment or observation while working, which supports the concept of lifelong learning and the learning outcomes orientation.
Silvia Annen, Section 4.2

11. Aims and institutional arrangement of recognition approaches
Facilitation individuals’ employability
Norway and Netherlands: approaches involve stakeholders of any sector – formal educational system, private sector and non-profit sector
England: approach pays high attention towards private sector
France: approach mainly focuses on formal system
Norwegian, Dutch and English approach allow vocational standards as reference
Strong involvement of stakeholders of private sector promotes their acceptance within this context

12. Aims and institutional arrangement of recognition approaches
Formal qualification of the individuals:
Consistent that all approaches engage stakeholders of formal educational system
All approaches mainly oriented towards national educational standards and assessment standards regarding process and output (necessary to lead to a formal qualification)
Except English approach (based on system of institutional accreditation) all leave rights of awarding qualifications up to stakeholders of the formal educational system which abets acceptance of the approaches
All approaches are coordinated via networks; to guarantee uniformity hierarchical coordination mechanisms also used (mainly formal laws like in France and Norway)

13. Connections between recognition approaches and NQFs - national
Rather diverse relationships between the national design of the recognition approaches and corresponding NQFs
France:
Conceptual points of reference between recognition approach and NQF
French NQF (RNCP) plays decisive role within national recognition approach recognition (VAE); all qualifications registered in RNCP must be acquirable through VAE
Registration in RNCP furthermore necessary for financing VAE
England:
To certain extent also connection between NVQs and QCF (Qualifications and Credit Framework); based on a national standard NVQs document that a candidate is competent within a certain area which is fixed within the QCF
Learning outcomes approach (whose use is required within QCF) is closely linked to use of recognition of prior learning
QCF works as superior structuring instrument, but is only limited suitable as information instrument
Silvia Annen, Section 4.2

14. Connections between recognition approaches and NQFs - national
Netherlands:
NLQF as instrument to further strengthen role of Dutch EVC-approach as integrated part of qualifications system and strengthen basis of learning outcomes and competence approach for existing validation system as well as education and training in general
ECV-procedures mainly directed towards formal recognition (NQF as reference)
Dutch NQF as basis for competence-oriented formulation of qualification profiles
Norway:
By using the learning outcomes approach to describe all qualifications the NKR has potential regarding development of new instruments for valuing competences acquired outside the formal system
One important reason to use learning outcomes is encouraging the consistency of curricula to support the validation of non-formal and informal learning
Because curricula are references for validation the shift towards learning outcomes influences the way validation is carried out
Development of NQF went along with paying attention towards recognition of learning outcomes
Netherlands and Norway:
Recognition approaches and comprehensive NQFs try to integrate the labour market and recognise learning outcomes acquired in vocational contexts
Source: Cedefop 2012

15. Connections between recognition approaches and NQFs - general
Aims connected with recognition approaches and NQFs partly correspond to each other
Competence concepts used within both instruments are often rather similar and open towards different learning contexts
In analysed countries the implementation of recognition approaches as well as NQFs goes along with a stronger orientation towards learning outcomes, which results in also outcome-orientated vocational norms and standards
Points of reference also regarding institutional aspects: e.g. involved stakeholders are partly the same and the relevant networks between them are similar
Silvia Annen, Section 4.2

16. Consequences for VET
Activities towards further development of recognition approaches promote acceptance and meaning of experiential (vocational) learning
As NQFs in some countries try to build a connection between educational sub systems (France and England) and between educational system and labour market (Norway and Netherlands), they also promote meaning of experiential (vocational) learning
Although diverse points of reference between recognition approaches and NQFs can be identified there are still potentials regarding a better consideration of non-formal and informal learning within NQFs

17. Final remarks and recommendations
Learning outcomes approach and validation of non-formal and informal learning strengthen each other
In general difficult to evaluate the extent to what the learning outcomes perspective influences pedagogical approaches and learning methods
Regarding assumption that NQFs can potentially support recognition of non-formal and informal learning Young (2005) remarks that these promises have not been realized for a number of reasons (pedagogical as well as institutional aspects make formalization of non-formal and informal acquired learning outcomes rather difficult) > suggests use of APEL (Accreditation of Prior Experiential Learning) less for qualifications and more for access
On the basis of above results one can recommend an increased use of both other types of recognition approaches ‘Autonomy’ and ‘Secondation’
Both not as strongly orientated towards formal qualification but potentials regarding counselling, preparation and documentation
Silvia Annen, Section 4.2

18. Thank you for your attention!
Contact:
Dr. Silvia Annen, Section 4.2