1. 1 The articulation between Higher education frameworks and general frameworks; challenges and opportunities Development of National Qualifications Frameworks 2 nd meting of National Correspondents Dublin Castle 16 April 2010 Jens Bjornavold Gordon Clark

2. Cedefop mapping of NQF developments First overview (September 2009) available on http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/publications/5030.aspx Second overview will be available for beginning of May 2010 and an update over developments in all 32 countries involved in the EQF cooperation a particular focus on the relationship between NQFs for Higher education (responding to the European higher Education Area) and the NQFs for lifelong learning responding to the EQF

3. NQF developments in Europe; main tendencies Comprehensive NQFs – covering all levels and types of qualifications – are being developed in all 32 countries; QF-EHEA forms a separate but interlinked part of these developments in most countries Malta the first country (in September 2009) to combine the self-certification to the EHEA and the referencing to the EQF The deadlines for implementing QF-EHEA and EQF are broadly in line

4. The relationship between qualifications frameworks for lifelong learning (EQF) and Qualifications Frameworks for higher education (QF-EHEA) Overlap in functions: The EQF Recommendations emphasises that levels 6-8 of the EQF corresponds to the first, second and third cycles of the EHEA Differing functions: The QF-EHEA have a particular focus on the needs of the higher education sector and supports a certain harmonization of provisions. EQF focus on the overall qualifications system, its transparency and permeability and do not seek institutional harmonization

5. The relationship between NQFs for Lifelong learning and for Higher education (1) Countries developing integrated national qualifications frameworks –Explicit emphasis on permeability, emphasises the need for vertical and horizontal progression –Level descriptors follow the same logic from level 1-8 –Levels 6-8 are explicitly open to qualifications awarded outside the traditional higher education area (defined by the EHEA) Examples: Irish NFQ and emerging Polish and German NQF

6. The relationship between NQFs for Lifelong learning and for Higher education (2) Countries with a clear dividing line between what corresponds to level 1-5 and 6-8 of EQF - Level 1-5 descriptors and level 6-8 descriptors based on different logics - Levels 6-8 are not open to qualifications awarded outside the traditional higher education area (defined by EHEA). Examples: Danish NQF and emerging Belgian (French speaking community) QF

7. The relationship between NQFs for Lifelong learning and for Higher education (3) Countries developing parallel level structures and descriptors at levels 6-8 of EQF - Levels 6-8 are open to all qualifications but distinguishes between different strands of qualifications and refer to different descriptors. Example: Austrian NQF - Levels 6-8 are open to all qualifications but distinguishes between different strands of qualifications and refer to the same descriptors. Example: The Belgian (Flemish) NQF

8. The integration of framework initiatives; possible implications When should EQF and QF-HE complement each other, when should they play separate roles? To what extent will the integration/lack of integration influence the lifelong learning objective (permeability/access/transfer and progression)? How will the relationship between QF-LLL and QF-EHEA influence implementation of supporting instruments (credit transfer, quality, validation)? How can we improve cooperation between EQF and EHEA at national and European level? We need a coordinated EQF referencing/EHEA self-certification to address these issues