EQF Network Testing Project

Call proposal DG EAC/22/06

EQF implementation:

Towards a network of
National Coordination
Points

Duration of the project : January 2007 to December 2008

This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any
use which may be made of the information contained therein
2
 Index

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................5

CHAPTER 1 : QUALIFICATIONS APPROACHES AND CONCEPTS BY COUNTRY ......7

1. Preamble .......................................................................................................................................... 8
2. EQF Key concepts ........................................................................................................................... 9
3. The concept of qualification ......................................................................................................... 10
4. The concept of learning outcomes............................................................................................... 14
5. The concepts of assessment and validation/certification ........................................................... 25
6. The concept of standard .............................................................................................................. 29
7. The concept of competent body .................................................................................................. 32

CHAPTER 2 : IMPACT OF EQF .......................................................................................33

Introduction................................................................................................................................................ 34
1. Belgium........................................................................................................................................... 35
2. France ............................................................................................................................................ 36
3. Italy ................................................................................................................................................. 38
4. Poland ............................................................................................................................................ 39
5. Romania ......................................................................................................................................... 40
6. Spain .............................................................................................................................................. 41
7. Scotland and Wales ....................................................................................................................... 43

CHAPTER 3 : REFLECTIONS ABOUT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF NQFS .................49

1. Analysis of national qualification systems and of the existing or in building frameworks .............. 50
2. Analysis of national qualifications systems processes: obstacles and opportunities .................... 55
3. Methods for referencing NQFs to the EQF levels .......................................................................... 69
4. Overall conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 77

CHAPTER 4 : RECOMMENDATIONS ..............................................................................79

Introduction................................................................................................................................................ 80
Recommendation 1 - Transparency of information on EQF concepts and indicators for qualification
classification .............................................................................................................................................. 81
Recommendation 2 Provision of in depth analyses of EQF concepts ................................................... 82
Recommendation 3 Exchanges of practices about translation from NQF to EQF ................................. 84
Recommendation 4 Better use of the existing supporting information and documentation related to the
content of qualification (e.g. Europass)..................................................................................................... 85
Recommendation 5 Articulation of the 2005/36 directive levels grid with the EQF for the qualifications
concerning regulated professions ............................................................................................................. 86
Recommendation 6 Providing a set of documentation to cater for all stakeholders.............................. 87
Recommendation 7 - Reminder to the Member States to officially designate NCPs ............................... 88
Conclusion................................................................................................................................................. 89

3
ANNEX RELATING TO THE CHAPTER 2........................................................................91

ANNEX RELATING TO THE CHAPTER 3......................................................................103

ANNEXES RELATING TO THE CHAPTER 4.................................................................104

Annex 1 : Belgian proposal ..................................................................................................................... 104
Annex 2 : Certificate supplement ............................................................................................................ 105
Annex 3: Articulation with the directive 2005/36 ..................................................................................... 107

4
Introduction
EQF Network Testing (EQFNET-T) is one of twelve projects agreed by the European Commission in 2006
following the call for proposals DGEAC/22/06 concerning the implementation of the European Qualifications
Framework (EQF).

This project was designed by partner organisations who were either already involved in or knew they would
be responsible for referencing their national systems or national qualifications frameworks (NQFs) to the EQF.

This project undertook to observe and test the key concepts of the Recommendation at two levels; firstly at a
European level, and secondly at a national level where the concepts and principles were explored in the
context of historical and political developments.

The aim was to create a network of partners from which to test the following:

1. The development of a common understanding of the concepts and the use of the EQF
2. The development of a common methodology to reference NQFs to the EQF in order to ensure mutual
trust.

Over the duration of the project, many changes have occurred which have influenced the development of
NQFs as well as those frameworks which already exist. For example, new legislative documents have been
produced and there have been a number of projects which have provided real reflection about the EQF in all
its different dimensions.

The EQF is not simply an 8 level grid; it signifies an opportunity to approach qualifications in, what is for
1
many countries across Europe, a new way . The implementation of the EQF obliges those developing
qualifications to make a shift from describing and developing qualifications based on learning inputs towards
a learning outcomes approach and to focus on the impact and use of the qualification in an individual's
professional life.

This report presents a synthesis of the exchanges that took place over the duration of the project and draws
conclusions about the usability and applicability of the concepts and principles presented in the
Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of the European
Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning, proposed in May 2006. A website has also been launched
which provides an overview of the documentation produced over the course of the project at both a national
and transnational level. The website can be accessed via the following link: http://www.eqfnet-testing.eu/.

The project comprised of three key phases resulting in a variety of tools and outputs for comparison
between the project partners:

1. An inventory of how each country identifies and classifies qualifications with regard to the
development of an NQF. This included types of qualification, those responsible for the delivery of
qualifications and what types of social currency and recognition qualifications have.

2. A comparative analysis aimed at identifying the characteristics of qualifications which can be

translated via the EQF.

3. A reflection phase which aimed at identifying:

- the main policies and principles which would be required at a national level to set up an NQF (possibly,
eventually with legal or regulatory structures)
- a dissemination plan to ensure effective implementation
- the support mechanisms necessary to develop the mutual trust required to make the EQF work effectively.

1
Qualification will be considered in this project on a broader aspect and not only related to non formal and informal learning outcomes
recognition. Its process concerns the validation and recognition of individuals learning outcomes but also the recognition of the content
and currency of the standards and references used to recognize individuals.

5
The exchanges that took place into qualifications across partner countries identified a significant gap in
transparency of information and evidence, in particular when considering the content and meaning of
qualifications. This observation was however outside of the remit of this project and should be considered as
a specific and separate area of research.

This report is composed of 4 chapters:

Chapter 1: Qualification approaches and concepts by country

The European Commission provides a specific definition of 'qualification', however in the countries
participating in this project it is observed that the currency, content and the process of qualification
development vary greatly. With such diversity, how can the different concepts and principles provided by the
Recommendation be utilised effectively and comparatively across countries? The concepts in the
Recommendation were based on the assumption that there was a clear explanation and a common
understanding at a European and national level of key concepts such as learning outcomes, competence,
qualification and skills. This chapter illustrates how important it is to be cautious when translating these
concepts both in terms of language at a national level as well as in terms of the societal context and
understanding in each country.

Chapter 2: Impact of EQF.

This chapter explores the status of EQF implementation in the partner countries as well as the extent of
knowledge and understanding of the EQF across the different sectors of education and training and the
stakeholders involved in the implementation of NQF and EQF.

Chapter 3: Critical points toward implementation.

This chapter suggests that the Recommendation and accompanying documents provided by the
Commission may not be sufficient to permit successful implementation. It therefore explores what is required
to effectively implement the EQF and provides some recommendations for modifications or additions to what
is currently available to Member States including tools and explanatory documentation. It also makes an
argument for a common methodology or approach to referencing, the focus of which is to look beyond the
referencing process as simply being about an 8 level grid, to a more holistic approach to referencing which
would ensure mutual trust between countries.

Chapter 4: Issues for network

This chapter proposes 7 recommendations towards effective EQF and NQF implementation and concludes
to develop a network between the National Coordination Points in charge of the implementation to this end.

6
 Chapter 1

QUALIFICATION APPROACHES
AND CONCEPTS BY COUNTRY

7
1. PREAMBLE
The EQF as well as the variety of EU tools on offer to enhance mobility and transparency of qualifications
and qualifications systems focus on the learning outcomes (LO) that people have gained in different contexts
and on the quality assurance systems that can guarantee the effectiveness of the validation process.

This is a significant step in the new European and global context towards overcoming some common beliefs
typical of education and training systems, for example, that improving training quality is the key towards
building a European learning place. The application of learning outcomes is yet to become common practice
within the validation process. Validation is often regarded as a formal and necessary duty and not as a real
added value for the individual who has completed a learning path (or part of it). The importance of quality
assured validated qualifications to enable mobility across different working and learning contexts, both
European and global appears underestimated.

Within the most recent European documentation on EQF and ECVET (European Credit system for
Vocational Education and Training), the importance given to learning outcomes and their component parts of
knowledge, skills and competences (KSC), requires a completely new consideration of their validation.

In fact the validation of learning outcomes is acquiring more and more value in contributing to modernising
both education and vocational training systems; becoming a bridge between formal, non-formal and informal
learning and recognition. The following diagram illustrates the shift from a traditional approach related to
learning achieved in formal contexts to the validation of learning outcomes achieved in different contexts.

Formal contexts Non-formal

Formal
Validation Learning
process process
SHIFT Validation
Learning
process
process
Informal

Figure 1 the validation process and contexts

This shift is not as direct or straightforward as expected when implemented into national education and VET
systems. This is often either the result of variations in definitions and understanding of concepts as well as
practice embedded in historical and political contexts which can make it more challenging to make the
transition.

This chapter provides an analysis of the key concepts described in the Recommendation of the EQF which
have been tested by the countries participating in the EQFNET-T Project. It illustrates from a technical
perspective, how the key concepts give rise to uncertainties and difficulties in their understanding and
application across different countries and contexts and therefore poses some questions for the effective
implementation of EQF.

As part of this phase of the project and in an attempt to overcome some of these difficulties, the partners
also developed some hypotheses in order to operationalise these key concepts and to help develop a
common understanding.

8
2. EQF KEY CONCEPTS
The key concepts of the EQF are identified in the definition of 'qualification', which is the specific subject of
the EQF.

The Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the EQF of the 23 April 2008
(Annex I) states that: qualification means a formal outcome of an assessment and validation process
which is obtained when a competent body determines that an individual has achieved learning outcomes
to given standards. The key concepts within this definition are represented in the following diagram.

Learning
outcomes

Competent
body Assessment
QUALIFICATION

Standard Validation

Figure 2 - the EQF key concepts

For a complete and contextualized understanding of the EQF, it is important to consider that, the conceptual
framework is much more structured and complex than the one represented in Figure 2. It also includes for
example education, training and employment policies and their interrelationships; research, economic and
social policies; life long learning policies; the European area of continuous learning; strategies and initiatives
relating to transparency of qualifications and the validation of non-formal and informal learning.

However this project is solely concerned with the analysis the key concepts outlined in Figure 2, as they form
the basis for EQF implementation. The analysis of the key concepts involved examining their meaning and
understanding within the countries participating in the EQFNET-T Project.

9
3. THE CONCEPT OF 'QUALIFICATION'
Understanding the term 'qualification' has often proved problematic when applied to different countries or
contexts as it can mean either something a qualified person has in order to do a job, or something that
he/she has because he/she holds a certificate.

The concept of qualification has been defined in the most recent European documents (on EQF and
ECVET), but it has also been used previously; sometimes with different meanings, within Member States.
What follows are the definitions of qualification in the Recommendation as well as its use within the countries
participating in the project.

3.1 The concept of 'qualification' within the European documents

The definition of 'qualification' provided by the Recommendation is clear enough not to cause confusion.
According to the Recommendation, 'qualifications' are statements (formal outcomes) issued by public and
private institutions, authorised by national or local authorities (competent body) to certify that an individual
has achieved specific 'acquisitions' (learning outcomes) related to specific standards (given standards) and
on the basis of a specific assessment system (assessment and validation process).
It is important to note that, according to this definition, the qualification is independent from learning
pathways, and therefore can be reached through a number of different pathways (school, university, VET
and non-formal and informal contexts).
This innovative feature of qualifications requires individuals to request and obtain validation and recognition
of learning outcomes acquired in non-formal and informal contexts thus promoting lifelong learning and
contributing to the mobility of people within the European labour market.
It is therefore stated that the EQF covers the full range of learning and qualifications, from that achieved at
the end of compulsory education and training to that achieved at the highest level of education and training,
promoting continuous learning. [Recommendation: The levels span the full scale of qualifications, from basic
(Level 1, for example school leaving certificates) to advanced (Level 8, for example Doctorates) levels. As an
instrument for the promotion of lifelong learning, the EQF encompasses all levels of qualifications acquired in
general, vocational as well as academic education and training. Additionally, the framework addresses
qualifications acquired in initial and continuing education and training].

3.2 The concept of 'qualification' within the countries participating in the EQFNET-T Project

Within the countries participating in the project the term qualification is translated in a variety of ways. For
example in France and Belgium 'qualification' translates as 'certification'. This illustrates how translation of
the concept into the national languages does not always fully correspond to the meaning shared at European
level, in this case, formalised in the definition of qualification in Annex I of the EQF Recommendation.
This variation in meaning, resulting from translation of 'qualification' into national languages is often
traditionally linked to specific subsystems. In Belgium the use of the French term 'certification' has always
been linked to the system of diplomas of Education. The use of the same term for the HE and for the VET
would require further adaptation. However in contrast, in Italy the term 'qualifica' and in Spain the term
'cualificacion' have traditionally been used in the VET system, and its use in the system of diplomas of
education and HE would require further adaptation.

In conclusion, according to the documentation produced during the Project, all countries suggested that,
apart from different traditions and terms used for translation into the national languages, from a conceptual
point of view there were no significant difficulties in using the EQF definition of 'qualification'. In some
countries, however, use of this definition will involve the adoption of a new concept, different from that
currently used but based on a common language.

The following table provides a synthesis of the main definitions and of the concept of 'qualification' provided
by each country.

10
 Table A Definition and understanding of 'qualification' by country

Belgium France Italy Poland Romania Scotland Spain Wales

The concept of
qualification has
The definition of
several meanings:
qualification
it is the formal
concerns two
output of a learning
approaches: a
and/or certification
collective approach
process (titoli e In Poland there are
(qualification is the
qualifiche such as: some definitions in
social recognition of A qualification is
attestato di qualifica, regards to the notion
competencies, achieved when a A professional
diploma, laurea, qualification. From 2003 all
necessary to occupy a competent body Content of qualification is
The definition of ecc) delivered by Vocational accredited learning,
specific job); and an determines that a qualification and/or defined as a set of
qualification a public institution; qualification: system including
individual approach person has reached a unit: what we really professional
(translated in French it defines of skills, knowledge mainstream
(qualification concerns specified standard of assess, validate and competences
by certification) is professions and and psychophysical qualifications
the skills necessary to knowledge, skills and certificate in terms of significant in
linked to the levels (qualifica) in features offered in Wales, will
occupy a range of wider competences knowledge, skills and employment which
Competent bodies the national indispensable to gradually be brought
jobs). (related to a reference competence. can be acquired
and it raises the collective perform a set of into a single unifying
Qualification is level within NQF). The These qualifications through vocational
question on what are, agreements; occupational tasks. structure the Credit
generally expressed standard of learning are designed to education and training
in each country, the General Vocational and Qualifications
in terms of outcomes is develop skills and (VET) modules or any
competent bodies. The Italian Qualifications: Framework for Wales.
certification which, confirmed by an knowledge in a other kind of learning
The French term definitions are partly requirements which The framework
according to the assessment process specific subject area structure as well as
certification has in coherent with the predispose to merges the concepts
competent bodies or the successful and achievement through work
Belgium a particular EQF definition. In perform work in of volume of learning
delivering it, can be completion of a shows that a learner experience.
meaning, linked to fact the processes of specific professional achievements (credit)
called: diploma, course of study. A has demonstrated the It is understood that a
the system of evaluation, validation area, usually covering and the demands
degree, vocational qualification confers specified knowledge person is qualified
diplomas of the and certification are a group of related made by that learning
title, sectoral official recognition of and skills for a when he/she achieves
Education. part of the Italian professions and on the learner (level)
certificate. value in the labour particular subject at the expected outcome
In the case of the concept of qualifica, specialities. to create a system
The French market and in further the defined national during his/her
French part of but, these processes Basic Vocational that is able to
definition education and standard. These professional
Belgium, there is no are not supported by Qualifications: embrace all types
(certification) is training. A qualifications are performance, with
agreement on this a homogeneous requirements which and styles of learning,
coherent with the qualification can be a generally studied in reasonable resources
subject. approach due to the enable effective and all
European one. It can legal entitlement to school but can also be and quality levels.
lack of a National performance of typical qualifications.
be observed that the practice a trade. taken at college.
Qualifications occupational tasks,
access to a
Framework. characteristic for a
certification imply
The Ministry of Labour given profession.
an assessment and
with a National
a validation of
Committee (Table) is
competences
improving common
process.
understanding and
approaches

11
In light of variations in understanding and use of the concept of 'qualification', it is proposed that in order to
effectively implement the EQF, that it will be necessary for countries to define 'qualification' in the context of
their own systems and subsystems in order to reach a common understanding. This would require each
country to develop and provide information about qualifications to enable transparency and allow a better
match with the European concept provided by the Recommendation. As part of this project, a standardised
template was developed to help enable countries to undertake this task. This tool was used among all the
participants in the project and the template adopted includes the following descriptors to describe
qualifications:
Nature of the qualification
Competent bodies involved in
o Assessment / Evaluation
o Validation / Certification
Standards on
o Content of qualification and/or unit (LO)
o Structure of qualification
o Content of procedures of assessment, validation and certification
o Competent bodies involved in the standards

Figure 3 example of the standard template used for a French qualification

This template was then used to test the coherence of each country's systems and subsystems with the
concept of 'qualification' found in the EQF Recommendation.

12
The following diagram is an example of the outcome of the testing from Italy. By using the template to make
explicit information about qualifications, it is possible to articulate the concept of 'qualification' with actual
examples across different countries and their subsystems. Being a standardised tool ensures coherence
across countries and facilitates transparency of the concept.

TRANSPARENCY

Diploma di Dottorato
HE Laurea Specialistica
Laurea

ED Diploma Istruzione
EQF secondaria di 2 grado
QUALIFICATION TOOL for TESTING
concept Diploma professionale di
tecnico
VET Qualifica di tecnico
Qualifica di operatore
professionale
Etc
COHERENCE

Figure 4 example of the outcome of testing of EQF qualification concept using the standardised
template

13
4. THE CONCEPT OF 'LEARNING OUTCOMES'
The learning outcomes approach which underpins the implementation of the EQF is generally accepted
within the countries involved in the project. However, from a conceptual point of view, there are some
uncertainties surrounding the use of the three components described in the EQF documentation which make
up learning outcomes: knowledge, skills and competence. Some difficulties also arise due to the shift from a
focus on the process of teaching (learning input) to the outcome of teaching (learning output).

What follows is an analysis of this learning outcomes concept as defined in the Recommendation as well as
its definition within the countries participating in the EQFNET-T project.

4.1 The concept of 'learning outcomes' within the European documents

The Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the EQF of the 23 April 2008
defines learning outcomes as statements of what a learner knows, understands and is able to do on
completion of a learning process. Results are defined in terms of knowledge, skills and competences.

Figure 5 learning Outcomes

Learning outcomes refer to proven, observed and documented outcomes, not only expected ones, and are
the object of assessment and validation processes.

4.1.1 Learning outcome categories

The Recommendation divides learning outcomes into three different categories: knowledge, skills and
competences, and provides a description of them in the Annex 1.

Among these three definitions, 'competence' seems to be a quite complex concept as it includes the previous
two categories (knowledge and skills) in its description: competence means the proven ability to use
knowledge, skills and personal, social and/or methodological abilities, in work or study situations and in
professional and personal development.

The central position given to learning outcomes in the EQF emphasises the importance of the adoption of a
common language to compare learning on the basis of content and profile and not on methods and paths.
This will provide an opportunity for the validation of learning achieved in non-formal and informal contexts to
count in the same way as that which has been achieved via a more formal route. Therefore, the adoption of
the learning outcomes concept reflects an important and innovative approach to describing and validating
(certifying) learning. The attention is no longer on learning inputs typical of the teaching process (contents,
length of the learning experience, type of institution), but on learning outcomes, typical of learning processes.
Therefore, the focus has shifted to learning across all contexts that can provide the right opportunities,
motivations and the necessary support for achievement.

14
 SHIFT

Figure 6 shift from learning input to outcome

With regard to implementation of the EQF, the emphasis on the results of learning rather than input will
involve Member States describing qualifications and their associated levels using learning outcomes
descriptors.

4.1.2 LO descriptors and EQF levels

Learning outcomes descriptors are wide enough to embrace all the differences of European systems and
thus to foster transparency and comparison among countries. This is a sensible advantage for the practical
implementation of the EQF, however in many cases the descriptors could be considered to be open to
interpretation which might in turn act as a restriction when implementing the EQF.

Looking at the descriptors more closely it is possible to identify some problems related to their wide scope.
For example, considering that the definition of knowledge, provided by Recommendation, is the outcome of
the assimilation of information through learning, the descriptor which includes basic general knowledge
(level 1) does not lead to a clear understanding of what must be observed to assess this:

Knowledge descriptors:
basic general knowledge (level 1)
knowledge of facts, principles, processes and general concepts, in a field of work or study (level 3)
knowledge at the most advanced frontier of a field of work or study and at the interface between fields
(level 8)

Skills descriptors:
basic skills required to carry out simple tasks (level 1)
a range of cognitive and practical skills required to accomplish tasks and solve problems by selecting and
applying basic methods, tools, materials and information (level 3)
the most advanced and specialised skills and techniques, including synthesis and evaluation, required to
solve critical problems in research and/or innovation and to extend and redefine existing knowledge or
professional practice (level 8)

Competence descriptors:
work or study under direct supervision in a structured context (level 1)
take responsibility for completion of tasks in work or study; adapt own behaviour to circumstances in solving
problems (level 3)
demonstrate substantial authority, innovation, autonomy, scholarly and professional integrity and sustained
commitment to the development of new ideas or processes at the forefront of work or study contexts
including research (level 8)

In order to guarantee a wideness of scope on the one hand and to limit misinterpretation on the other, it is
recommended that a more detailed contextualisation of the descriptors be provided.
The learning outcomes descriptors are also used to define specific EQF levels (as highlighted in the
examples above). The 8 levels of the EQF seem to be quite representative of the complexity of lifelong
learning pathways, however, the fact that the grid is fixed (8 levels) may require national systems or
frameworks of levels to either contract or widen (for example in Scotland their national qualification
framework comprises 12 levels, while in the Spanish system there are 5 levels).

With regard to progression between levels the project found that when testing some qualifications against
the EQF grid, that the different descriptors of knowledge, skills and competence could be attributed to
different levels for the same qualification. For example it is possible for knowledge and skills to be attributed
to one level whilst the competences for the same qualification could be found at a lower level. Therefore
different weight can be applied to the different components of learning outcomes depending on the
qualification.

15
Moreover in some qualifications issued in formal systems it has been noted that learning outcomes are often
represented only in terms of knowledge and skills, without any description of competences. This is often due
to a hierarchy of knowledge over skills or competences in particular subsystems.
Therefore if the weighting of components is a practical reality for the representation of a qualification in terms
of learning outcomes within the EQF, it should be seen as a positive factor in the representation of learning
achieved by individuals in different contexts. In fact, it is important to adopt a flexible approach able to read
differentiated levels of knowledge, skills and competences, in order to make transparent personal and
professional learning outcomes that citizens and workers have acquired in non formal and informal contexts.
So, the description of learning outcomes is very important for improving mutual trust.

4.2 The concept of 'Learning Outcomes' within the countries participating in the EQFNET-T Project

For the countries participating in the project, the concept of learning outcomes as defined in the
Recommendation seems to be entirely accepted. Some variations in understanding have been found to
exist for policy makers in different countries, however the concept is yet to be introduced in all sub-systems
via the necessary legislation (for example in Belgium). In countries that have always used this approach (e.g.
Scotland, Wales) and those who have recently adapted their systems of qualifications to this end (e.g.
Romania and Poland), the sharing of a common understanding of the concept of learning outcomes seems
complete. Some difficulties have been noted in countries such as France, Spain and Italy whose systems are
characterised traditionally and historically by different approaches.

However, despite this seemingly widespread acceptance of the concept of learning outcomes, there are still
obstacles and difficulties which need to be overcome for effective implementation of the EQF. For example
Romania points out how the national stakeholders take different positions depending on the degree of
information available to them and France states that all the stakeholders are not completely up to date with
this approach, especially in HE. The project found that an understanding of the concept of learning outcomes
also requires a thorough knowledge of the traditional Anglo-Saxon approach, from which it derives, and that
in European documents the concept of learning outcomes, is well-defined, but it is not contextualised and
this could create uncertainties in its implications and uses in those countries where the concept is quite new.
For example, Spain stresses that: Being a new concept, its uses need to be contextualized whilst France
highlights that most of the French stakeholders ask further information and more studies in depth to clarify
this concept.
With reference to the learning outcome categories, there are two approaches used within countries
participating in the EQFNET-T Project.
The first approach is more compliant with the learning outcome concepts found in the definition given in the
Recommendation in which learning outcomes are made up of three descriptors knowledge, skills and
competences, all described within their own right as represented in the following figure:

Figure 7 LO approach

16
In fact, in the EQF, skills, knowledge and competences are all used to represent mobility/integration factors
that help people to be able to generate effective performances. Moreover, the competences are related to
autonomy and responsibility that represent just two dimensions of a wider range of mobility/integration
elements.

In countries where this approach has been used, like Scotland, the descriptors are described as following:
The SCQF level descriptors give broad, general, but meaningful indicators of the characteristics of learning
at each level. These descriptors are not intended to give precise or comprehensive statements of required
learning at each level.
In the second approach to the concept of learning outcomes, the position is quite different. Competences are
considered to be the product of a combination of knowledge, skills and competence rather than the separate,
stand alone component as described in the first approach.
In several countries (Belgium, France, Spain and Italy) competences are defined as the ability to act in a
particular context (working, social) using knowledge, skills/competence as well as other personal resources
(attitudes, behaviour); or they are considered to be the product of a learning process, i.e. those learning
outcomes that, in a given context, convey effective performances, integrating knowledge, skills and other
personal resources together as elements of competences. This concept of competence is a more multi
layered and holistic definition than the first approach. This second approach is illustrated in the diagram
below:

LO Results

Competences
Knowledge

Skills

Figure 8 competence understanding

The diagram on the left shows how the EQF definition of learning
outcomes contains competences as a stand alone component. In
some countries however the concept of competence is inclusive
of knowledge and skills as can be seen in the diagram on the
right. This results in an understanding of the concept of learning
outcome as follows:

This approach based on the 'competence'

(Figure 9) allows an easier dialogue with
the labour market in which professional
profiles/standards are described in terms
of competence, denominated in order to
identify the result of mobility and the
effective combination of resources
(knowledge, skills/competence and other
personal resources) in the associated
context.

Figure 9 competence approach

17
It is therefore observed that in countries where the second approach is more commonplace, the meaning of
competence is different from the one used in the EQF, in which competence is simply one category of
learning outcomes and considered to be on an equal footing with knowledge and skills.
For example France declares: This concept of competencies is used to explain what is the framework of the
qualification used in the labour market (what kind of activities, functions, skills can be made by the
qualification owner) and Belgium states: the term competence has not the same meaning as the definition
given in the third column in the EQF.

On the other hand there are countries like Poland and Romania where the learning outcome approach is
becoming dominant and the competence approach is considered less appropriate. On this subject Romania
points out that: The competence approach is more appropriate to the definition of occupational standards
(job description). The qualifications as an assessment outcome could be better reflected by LO. A problem
could appear in using the term of competence as a component of learning outcome when the qualification
makes reference to possible occupations which are described by competencies.

The fact that there exist several ways to describe (and validate) learning outcomes, has been considered a
challenge to the mutual understanding of the EQF concepts and as a consequence its implementation.
Despite this, the more holistic competence approach is not presented as an alternative to the learning
outcomes approach. In fact, apart from different traditions and uses, the concept of learning outcomes as
found in the European documentation, is accepted and it is going to be implemented in all countries,
especially in VET systems. For example, Spain considers that the LO approach must be considered. as
an open process or trend related to the implementation of LLL. In fact, when looking at the sub-systems in
which learning outcomes are used, there is a prevalence in the VET systems and in training processes,
however each country differs slightly with regard to its application across equivalent subsystems. In France
all sub-systems try to follow the same approach of LO, while in the Academic system [in Italy] the
descriptors developed in the Bologna process are (more or less formally) adopted and it is the same in most
of the countries participating in the project.

Further difficulties surrounding the understanding of the descriptors as proposed in the EQF documentation
have arisen from the policy makers and stakeholders perspective and it is for this reason that some
countries felt they would benefit from further information and work to clarify the concept (e.g. France).
However, information provided from the countries participating in this project shows that there is a general
consensus of agreement on the learning outcomes approach, especially within the labour market
(enterprises, social partners).

The tables (B, C, D, E, F and G) on the following pages compare how each country defines and understands
the concept of learning outcomes.

18
 Table B Understanding of Learning Outcomes: by country

Belgium France Italy Poland Romania Scotland Spain Wales

The concept of
learning outcome
The approach for has been used in VET
In Poland the
developing the LO, domain in the 90s and
The concept of LO educational concept
has in Italy a high since 2003 it is part of
depends on the sub- based on LO is
Generally in the level of the methodological
systems. related to the Broadly speaking, the
official translation, the understanding. approach adopted in
In the future, with the organisation of following definition of
term LO is translated Until now the different the National System
project of a same external exams, after Romanian concept of LO (ECTS Users
in French by rsultats Educational and for Qualifications and
description for IVET, each phase of Learning outcomes Guide, p.47) is
dapprentissage, Vocational Training VET (Organic Law
CVET, validation of education. was taken from the accepted and applied
rsultats de formation, Systems used 5/2002). Learning Outcomes
competences and LO are the basis of definitions included across all sectors of
acquis according to different approaches Being a new concept, are statements of
education for adults, the examination in the EQF Scottish education
the text concerned. In to define national its uses need to be what a learner can be
the use of LO will be requirements Recommendation and training:
the French policies, standard of contextualized: the expected to know,
explicit. The standards. and includes the Learning outcomes
LO concern non qualifications. Spanish translation of understand and/or do
definition of LO in the At this moment components of are statements of
formal, informal and Recently the LO learning outcomes as a result of a
project of decree is Poland is elaborating Knowledge, skills what a learner is
formal learning and approach has been (resultados del learning experience
the same as in the a National strategy of and competence as expected to know,
the descriptions of the adopted by the aprendizaje)
European lifelong learning they are described in understand and/or
LO are made in the Ministry of Labour to constitutes the core
recommendation where rules of LO the document. demonstrate after
same manner develop the National of the concept of
without reference to will be put in, completion of a
whatever is the type Qualification System capacities defined
knowledge, skills according to process of learning.
of learning. within the National as the expression of
and competencies. concepts developed
Table (Committee) set the expected learning
by the European
up in 2006 outcomes of learners
Union.
after completion of the
learning/training
module.

19
 Table C - Learning Outcomes: categories used by each country

Belgium France Italy Poland Romania Scotland Spain Wales

The components of
the LO concept are
We must distinguish
spelled out in the
several sub-systems: There are various
In the French training/learning
A in the ED, LOs approaches to
policies, LO concern The SCQF level specifications of the
have not yet formally writing Learning
non formal, informal descriptors give training modules:
adopted, but specific Outcomes and
and formal learning broad, general, but they shall be
learning objectives Assessment Criteria.
and the descriptions Exam confirming meaningful indicators expressed as
described in terms of The success of
of the LO are made vocational of the characteristics capacities and their
knowledge and communicating
in the same manner qualification, aims at of learning at each corresponding
abilities have been learning achievement
whatever is the type assessing the level of level. These assessment criteria as
developed. in Units is not likely to
of learning. knowledge and skills descriptors are not well as the contents
B in the Academic be based on
In practice, in the area of intended to give and learning/training
HE the descriptors prescribing what the
stakeholders in appropriate precise or parameters.
developed in the precise terminology
charge of LO profession, indicated comprehensive We find two different
Bologna process for Learning
description use two in examination statements of required general uses of LO
(Dublin descriptors Outcomes and
different approaches: standards that is the learning at each level. (under other
with reference to the Romanian concept of Assessment Criteria
In practice we find in A LO can be seen basis of doing exam Each level from 2-12 denominations, e.g.
models of the Tuning LO includes the should be. There is no
LO savoirs, savoirs- as training results confirming vocational has a descriptor which Objectives, etc) as
project) are formally components of: established orthodoxy
faire et savoir-tre ou (rsultat de qualification. sets out its goals to be attained,
adopted. Knowledge as to the extent to
savoirs, aptitudes et formation). In this Since 1998 the characteristic general as minimal or critical
C in the non skills and which level is
attitudes case, especially when Ministry of Labour and outcomes under 5 learning, key-
academic HE (IFTS), competence conveyed in a Unit by
corresponding to trainers or teachers Social Policy has broad headings: competences, in
the LO approach is as they are described Assessment Criteria
knowledge, skills and are involved, the LO developed the knowledge and compulsory and
fully adopted and in the EQF alone, or by a
competences. can be considered as concept of National understanding education levels.
expressed in terms of recommendation. combination of
input. They are Occupational mainly subject-based; Some variety in
competences related Learning Outcomes
expressed in terms Qualifications practice: applied typologies and KSC
to an integration of and Assessment
of training Standards knowledge and distribution.
knowledge and Criteria. There is no
programmes, documents containing understanding; In the contest of
abilities overall orthodoxy as
training content... descriptions of generic cognitive labour, the LO are
D to integrate the to the combination of
B - LO can be vocational tasks, skills, e.g. evaluation, considered through
different subsystems tenses used in writing
considered as skills, knowledge critical analysis; Units of
the Ministry of Labour units. And can use a
assessment results. and attitudes communication, Competence
set up a nationa l combination of
In this case, LO are required from the numeracy and IT described through
committee to build a future (Learning
expressed in terms of employees. skills; professional
national qualifications Outcomes) and
type of element autonomy, performances which
system, adopting the present
assessed: accountability and set up the expected
LO approach, (Assessment
knowledge, skills, working with others. behaviour of one
expressed in terms of Criteria).
competencies... person in terms of
knowledge, skills
outcomes or results of
and competences.
the activities
performed.

20
 Table D- Learning Outcomes and Competence approach within each country

Belgium France Italy Poland Romania Scotland Spain Wales

For VET, the
distinction between Generally when the
job and qualification French stakeholders In Italy, the prevailing
profiles (what a are involved in LO approach in use is the
The competence The
professional has to do approach they refer one based on
approach is more interdependence
and which to competencies. "competence",
appropriate to the and/or interchange
competences he/she This concept of especially in VET and
definition of between both
must have) and competencies is used in the non-academic
occupational concepts is strong,
training profiles (what to explain what is the HE (e.g. IFTS), with a
standards (job but learning
a person is able do framework of the different meaning
description). outcome is a
after a training course qualification used in from the third column
The qualifications as subordinate concept
or what will be the labour market of the EQF. With regard to the It is more It is not appropriate to
an assessment to the more general
assessed in a (what kind of Competences are development of appropriate to refer refer to competence
outcome could be of competence.
validation process) activities, functions, developed in different external exams to Learning approach rather than
better reflected by We could consider
permits to skills can be made by contexts and system in general and Outcomes than learning outcomes
LO. that a shift towards a
differentiate the qualification knowledge, skills / vocational education, competences in the approach.
A problem could L.O. approach is
competences and owner). Those ability and other LO approach Scottish education No issues arise in
appear in using the present today. Such
LO. But the term competencies are personal resources becomes dominant. and training system. using LO approach
term of competence approach must be
competence has not the focus of the (attitudes, behaviour
as a component of considered, to our
the same meaning as assessment etc.) are used as
learning outcome view, as an open
the definition given in (evaluation) and the resources. These
when the qualification process or trend
the third column in the objectives of the skills are denominated
makes reference to related to the
EQF. training. Trainers and in order to identify the
possible occupations implementation of LLL
For general education teachers who made result of the mobility
which are described policies.
the distinction the referentiels are and the effective
by competencies.
between not all sufficiently combination of
competences and LO clever in such resources.
are not clear. It is the exercises.
same in HE.

21
 Table E- Learning Outcomes: sub-systems in which they are used by each country

Belgium France Italy Poland Romania Scotland Spain Wales

In compulsory
education, the
concepts of socles de
comptences and of
comptences
In France, especially We must distinguish
terminales were used
since 2002, all sub- several sub-systems:
before the European
systems try to follow A in the ED, LO
definition of LOs and
the same approach have not yet LO approach is
can be articulated as
of LO. All the sub- formally adopted realised in the It is used in VET
a form of LO.
systems start with B in the Academic system of education domain. Now, in the
Its the same case for
competencies based HE the descriptors and it includes exams current developments
the capacits
on referential to developed in the after finishing primary of the National
terminales for the
permit a better Bologna process are school, lower System for Higher Education
Education for adults.
guidance and access formally adopted secondary school, Qualifications and and Regulated
For IVET there exist The use of LO in
to the labour market. C in the non secondary schools, VET, covering both Qualifications have
description of the job education and training
Actually most of the academic HE (IFTS), vocational schools. IVET and Vocational both fully adopted
(in term of activities), The learning outcome programmes and their
sub-systems are the LO approach is Initiation Programs the learning outcomes
of the qualification in approach was more assessment is
moving towards this fully adopted LO approach does (PCPIs), it deals with approach. The third
term of competences developed in initial embedded across
approach to build their D in VET, regional not include the drop-out, as well pillar of learning
and of the training, VET. training and
qualifications, bodies launched an education at as CVET (Training for Quality Assured
expressed in LO. education sectors,
because it is updating of the university level and Employment), where Lifelong Learning-
CVET uses mainly the or sub-systems.
compulsory to make qualifications system non-formal and the approach is more QALL is beginning to
same sort of
these qualifications adopting the LO informal education, clear, with specific adopt this approach.
description.
available through non- approach. where the emphasis is terminologies and
The Consortium de
formal and informal Since 2006 a common on the educational conceptual
validation des
LO recognition. But approach has been process and the arrangements.
competences uses
all the stakeholders set up by the Ministry realisation of formal
job profiles,
are not completely of Labour according educational curricula.
competences profiles
updated with this with the Ministry od
and validation
approach, especially Education and
profiles. The last
in HE. regional bodies
ones can be seen to
be expressed in LO.
For HE there is no
systematic usage of
LO.

22
 Table F - Learning Outcomes: how the concept of LO is used (ex. in assessment, validation/certification, training, etc.)

Belgium France Italy Poland Romania Scotland Spain Wales

In
validation/certification
Where were as a basis for the
introduced, the LO establishment of
represents the criteria of
LOs are or will be reference point for performance and
used in VET: both the design of assessment of
to define training learning pathways learning and
Any qualification
(what the learner is (expected results) subsequently of the
The LO is used in carrying SCQF The design of the
able to do after the LOs are the bases of and for the At this moment procedures for the
describing credits must have programmes is
training) and training supply and certification of the Poland uses the assessment and
qualifications (as it quality assured intrinsically linked to
to define the base for the objectives or results concretely concept of LO in validation
is the case of training assessment of the the design of learning
the assessment for contents of achieved by external (accreditation) of
standards in initial achievement by the outcomes and
the validation of non validation/certification individuals examination completed learning in
VET) and in the learner of the LO, assessment criteria.
formal and informal processes. system. the formal, non-formal,
certification process. before credit is
learning (what the Since 2006 This is informal and work
awarded.
candidate has to the common experience contexts.
prove or is able to referrence adopted In the qualifications of
do). by the Ministry of the National Catalogue
labour to define the of Professional
national standards Qualifications serve as
basis and reference
for titles/diplomas
and related programs

23
 Table G- Learning Outcomes: the current position of the stakeholders of each country

Belgium France Italy Poland Romania Scotland Spain Wales

Reforms are more
and more based on
the evaluation of the
LO.
For the French At the moment
stakeholders, the programmes in ED
Stakeholders position
concept of the are based on learning Social partners, legal
regarding the
European approach of input, even if teachers authorities, education
European approach
LO is quite difficult and experts and training
of LO is mediated by
to implement. To encourage the LO institutions and other
the respective
really understand this approach. important bodies took
relationships between
notion, it is necessary Within the academic part actively in the
National Catalogue of
to know the anglo- sector there is a high process of
Professional
saxon approach from level of agreement consultation and sent
Before SCQF was Qualifications and
where this concept on the LO approach remarks and The national
developed, most of EQF. There is no current
was emerged. In the by policy makers suggestions related to stakeholders have
the main position as the
European texts, this and by a remarkable national different positions
qualifications in A LO approach has stakeholders are
concept is not part of universities. implementation of depending on their
Scotland already being valued by only just beginning
For VET the intention sufficiently and Nevertheless a great ECVET concept. degree of information.
had a learning employers and social to know about the
of developing LOs clearly explained. part of teachers does Social partners Those stakeholders
outcomes based partners as a way to EQF and the
exists. The stakeholders feel not see the agree that it is involved in the NQF
approach. There increase implications.
It is not the case for a real confusion when potentiality of the LO necessary to development are
was a major transparency of A national co-
HE. this concept is read approach. implement the supporting the LO
consultation on SCQF qualifications and as ordination point has
through the HE In VET the LO system of approach in order to
and the learning a means to establish been established in
approach (Bologna approach is recognition of non- create transparency
outcomes approach equivalences between Wales to look at
process or for appreciated by formal and informal and possibility for
has the support of subsystems and to these issues
example Tuning stakeholders but qualifications based recognition.
all stakeholders. favour
approach) where currently it is not on LO approach.
learner/worker/citizen
many different widespread. National Qualifications
mobility.
descriptions can be Ministry of Labour Framework will be
met. Most of the and Ministry of developed. Approach
The position is
French stakeholders Education with the oriented to learning-
different and in
ask further stakeholder social teaching process
general more critical
information and partners, enterprises will be replaced by
in HE.
more studies in and Local LO approach.
depth to clarify this Authorities agreed
concept. on the LO approach
as it uses a
language very close
to the one used in
the labour market.

24
5. THE CONCEPTS OF 'ASSESSMENT' AND 'VALIDATION /
CERTIFICATION'
Within the EQFNET-T Project, the terms validation and certification were often used interchangeably.
However due to difficulties in comparison, added to the fact that the term 'certification' is not used in recent
EQF documentation it was decided to focus on analysis of the term 'validation' instead.

This section also considers the impact that different understandings of the learning outcomes approach
could have on the validation processes. The European documentation suggests that certification of the
achievement of learning outcomes involves two different sub-processes: learning outcomes assessment and
learning outcomes validation. However it is important to clarify, whether the subject of assessment (i.e.
learning outcomes) is only concerned with the understanding of knowledge and the proof of a single skill and
competence (autonomy and responsibility), or whether it should take into account 'know how to behave' in a
complex situation, combining effectively a wide range of knowledge, skills and other personal resources.

5.1 The concept of 'validation' within the European documents

The concept of validation is used in European documents with several meanings that do not fully coincide
with each other and may therefore lead to misunderstanding and difficulty in application.
Below is a brief overview of these meanings.

5.1.1 The concept of 'validation' within the EQF

The term validation recurs several times in the Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the
Council on the establishment of the European Qualifications Framework, 2008. It is used mainly to refer to
2
the validation of formal and informal learning but is also used within the definition of qualification
qualification means a formal outcome of an assessment and validation process which is obtained when a
competent body determines that an individual has achieved learning outcomes to given standards. In this
case, the concept 'validation' is not limited to learning outcomes achieved formal contexts, as the EQF
considers a qualification achievable through a variety of pathways; formal, non-formal and informal.
It should be noted that assessment and validation processes suppose the development of a number of
related activities, some focused on assessment, some others on validation. In the text, these distinctions are
not explicit. In fact, in the glossary (Annex I), the definition of these two concepts (assessment and
validation) is not given.

It is also important to note that throughout the EQF text, the term certification is never quoted.

5.1.2 The concept of 'validation' within the ECVET

The term validation recurs frequently in the text of the proposal for a Recommendation of the European
Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of the European Credit system for Vocational Education
and Training (ECVET) COM (2008) 180 final.

This includes quotes from other European documents which refer to validation in non-formal and informal
3 4
contexts . In the main text , the term is used with a broad meaning, associated with those learning
outcomes important in VET and acquired in a variety of contexts.

2
The EQF can support individuals with extensive experience from work or other fields of activity by facilitating validation of non-formal
and informal learning (p. 4). The validation of non-formal and informal learning outcomes should be promoted in accordance with the
Council conclusions on common European principles for the identification and validation of non-formal and informal learning of 28 May
2004 (P. 6). This Recommendation should contribute to modernising education and training systems, the interrelationship of
education, training and employment and building bridges between formal, non-formal and informal learning, leading also to the
validation of learning outcomes acquired through experience (P. 7). use an approach based on learning outcomes when defining
and describing qualifications, and promote the validation of non-formal and informal learning in accordance with the common European
principles agreed in the Council conclusions of 28 May 2004 (P. 8).
3
This ECVET proposal belongs to a series of European initiatives, including the European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System
(ECTS), Europass, the European Quality Charter for Mobility (EQCM), the European principles for the identification and validation of
non formal and informal learning and the European Qualification Framework for lifelong learning (EQF) (P. 3). The European
principles for the identification and validation of non-formal and informal learning were agreed in the form of Council Conclusions in
2004 (P. 4). The validation of non-formal and informal learning outcomes should be promoted in accordance with the Council
conclusions on common European principles for the identification and validation of non-formal and informal learning of 28 May 2004
(P. 15).
4
The challenges related to mutual trust, transparency, validation and transfer of learning outcomes in VET on the European scale are
shared by all Member States and cannot be solved exclusively at national or sectoral levels (P. 7). apply the principles for quality

25
Within the Recommendation there is also a definition of the term: "Validation of learning outcomes": the
process of confirming that certain assessed learning outcomes achieved by a learner correspond to specific
outcomes which may be required for a unit or a qualification (Annex 1).

In contrast to the EQF text the validation process is independent from the assessment and recognition
processes. For these latter processes a definition is provided, as follows:

"Assessment of learning outcomes": methods and processes used to establish the extent to which a learner
has in fact attained particular knowledge, skills and competence.
"Recognition of learning outcomes": the process of attesting officially achieved learning outcomes through
the awarding of units or qualifications

As an aside, it has been observed that the term certification appears only in the introduction of the Proposal
5
for a Recommendation , in reference to other documentation.

In conclusion, the concept of validation, which appears to be used with different meanings in the examined
texts, looks as if specifically determined at the European level:

the application is connected to learning outcomes, acquired in all different contexts: formal, non-formal
and informal;
the focus of validation is the result of the assessment process, whose objective is to determine what an
individual has acquired in terms of specific knowledge, skills and competence;
the objective of the validation process aims at confirming that learning outcomes, achieved by a person
and assessed in the assessment process, are actually those required for a qualification (or a part of it:
e.g. a unit).

However, activities or examples typical of the process of validation are not described in the examined texts.

It seems reasonable to think that while the activities of the assessment process conclude with the objective
measurement of learning outcomes; the activities of validation are concerned with the association of this
measure with the standards required to award the qualification and, thus function, to give a value to that
measure in order to achieve a (partial or total) qualification.

5.2 The concept of 'validation' within countries participating in the EQFNET-T Project

In those countries participating in the EQFNET-T Project, the term validation is used in many different ways
and from a conceptual point of view is understood and used in ways which often do not link to European
definitions. For example in Scotland validation refers to the quality assurance processes.

assurance when using ECVET, particularly in relation to the assessment, validation and recognition of learning outcomes (Pag 16).
"Qualification": a formal outcome of an assessment and validation process which is obtained when a competent institution determines
that an individual has achieved learning outcomes to given standards (P. 18 Annex 1). "Competent institution": institution which is
responsible for designing and awarding qualification or recognising units or other functions linked to ECVET, such as allocation of
ECVET points to qualifications and units, assessment, validation and recognition of learning outcomes, under the rules and practices of
participating countries (P. 18 Annex 1). The units that make up a qualification should be described in legible and understandable
terms by referring to the knowledge, skills and competences contained in them constructed in a way that enables discrete
assessment and validation of learning outcomes contained in the unit. (P. 19 Annex II). Procedures and guidelines for the
assessment, validation, accumulation and recognition of units of learning outcomes are designed by the relevant competent
institutions. (P. 20 Annex II). Credit transfer based on ECVET and applied to learning outcomes achieved in formal learning contexts
should be facilitated by establishing partnerships and networks involving competent institutions, each of which is empowered, in their
own setting, to award qualifications or units or to give credit for achieved learning outcomes for transfer and validation (P. 20 Annex II).
The MoU should confirm that the partners accept each other's quality assurance, assessment, validation and recognition criteria
and procedures as satisfactory for the purposes of credit transfer (P. 20 Annex II). For applying ECVET to learning outcomes
achieved in non-formal and informal learning context or outside the framework of a MoU, the competent institution which is empowered
to award qualifications or units or to give credit should establish procedures and mechanisms for the identification, validation and
recognition of these learning outcomes through the award of the corresponding units and the associated ECVET points (P. 20 Annex
II). Validation and recognition by the competent "home" institution depend on the successful assessment of learning outcomes by the
competent "hosting" institution, in accordance with the agreed procedures and quality assurance criteria (P. 21 Annex II).
5
EQCM was adopted through the Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on trans-
national mobility within the Community for education and training purposes (European Quality Charter for mobility6). It states in point 8
of its Annex that, when mobility is undertaken by individuals, "participants should be provided with assistance to facilitate recognition
and certification" of learning outcomes. ECVET is intended to support the quality of individuals' mobility as required by the
abovementioned Recommendation (P. 4). They confirm that ECVET can be applied without calling into question the existing initial
education and vocational training system and the fundamental principles of certification and qualifications (Pp. 4-5).

26
In some countries (e.g. Italy), rules and practices formally assume the concept of validation, but it is also
referred to in the use of different terms, for example 'certification' which is defined as relating to either the
overall assessment, validation and recognition processes or the single process of recognition.

The term 'validation' has, however, become more commonplace in most of the project countries, mainly in
reference to learning acquired in non-formal and informal contexts. For example, Belgium defines validation
as the process of assessment and recognition of non formal and informal learning. However in other
countries, the concept is not widely used, for example in Wales [t]he term validation is not used. Only these
ones are used: assessment, award, certification.

In conclusion, on the basis of the documentation produced within the Project, it is possible to say that apart
from different traditions and different terms used in conjunction with or in place of 'validation' (e.g.
assessment, validation, awarding, recognition, certification), the activities of the validation process are well
developed at different levels and with a range of different methodologies across all of the national
qualifications systems of all the countries participating in the Project.

It seems, however, that this process does not have a strong and autonomous framework, as required for the
implementation of the EQF (and its related tools, e.g. ECVET). This, probably, derives from the different
national policies that assume or not the validation system as a part of their national qualifications systems.

It is therefore necessary to promote a new certification culture (assessment and validation) based on
learning outcomes in order to effectively implement the EQF. This is especially true with regards to the non-
formal and informal recognition. This means a shift from processes linked traditionally to exams and final
assessment within formal contexts, to processes referring to learning assessment processes across a variety
of contexts. This shift will also require assessment and validation processes to be quality assured. For
example the assessment process must include appropriate conditions and competences and a clear and
transparent reference to the standard to be achieved. Very few systems have developed such a frame.
Therefore, the validation process must rely on expertise, methods and procedures in order to assure its
reliability. The development of common methodologies for validation would go a long way to facilitating
mutual understanding of the concept.

Table (H) on the next page shows each country's understanding and use of the term 'validation' and its use
in the process.

27
 Table H Validation (certification): understanding of the concept and its use by country

Belgium France Italy Poland Romania Scotland Spain Wales

The term validation
The process through is not used, 3
which a Body processes are
(commission, experts, considered:
etc.) establishes that assessment, award,
the competences certification.
The validation acquired by an The validation and Assessment of LO is
By validation, we
process is made up of individual in formal, certification process of Validation refers to for arrangement
speak about specific
two sub-processes: non formal and learning outcomes the quality assurance Certification refers between the
act giving value to LO
assessment and informal contexts, and qualifications, processes, supported mainly to the official Recognised Body
according to a
recognition of non can be assessed taking into account by wide stakeholder documents delivered involved in the
referentiel.
formal and informal (valutate, in Italian), historical experiences consultation, which by authorized bodies recognition of the
This validation can be
learning. and recognized with and system solutions, ensure that all new, that resume the goals learning and
done after a formal
The assessment sub- respects to predefined have not been used The concept of revised or amended and degrees attained. centres/providers,
training process as
process is based on standard, delivered by so far in Poland. validation is not qualifications are with overall
well as after an
practical tests. a competent body. So the concept of currently used. valid etc Validation is linked responsibility for
informal or non-
The Consortium de Object of validation: validation is The SCQF level on the one hand to Quality Assurance
formal learning
validation des learning (in currently used. The process of descriptors can be the criteria and validity resting with the
process.
competences uses particular The process of certification seems used in validation issues and Recognised Body
Object of validation:
validation profiles. competences). validation does not to include both: events for procedures for the awarding credit.
learning (in
Validation profiles The concept of seem to be distinct assessment and qualifications and assessment and on Recognised Bodies
particular
define what is the validation has recently from the certification validation. programmes the other to the have established
competences).
base of the entered the Italian one, and the latter Object of validation: accreditation in order policies and practice
The process of
assessment of prior culture, but it is not seems to correspond qualifications and to formal recognition, in relation to
validation of
learning and serve to currently assumed as to the system of programmes, and it certification of assessment and
competences
elaborate the practical a national policy. external exams is not associated completed learning. standards.
incorporates the
test (mise en The process of incorporating also the with learning. The certification is
process of
situation). Object of validation of process of responsibility of
assessment.
validation: learning. competences assessment. Recognised Body
incorporates the Object of
process of assessment, award,
assessment certification:
(valutazione, in learning outcomes in
Italian). formal, non formal,
informal contexts.

28
6. THE CONCEPT OF 'STANDARD'
In the EQFNET-T Project the concept of standard has not been analysed in depth, but it has been explored
in order to verify the link between the process of qualifications development and the associated different
types of standards.

During the project it has been recommended that the existence of an appropriate system of standards would
be extremely useful, and in some cases necessary, to support the implementation of the EQF in each
country. For instance, there is a problem of measurability of learning outcomes that are described in a
qualitative way. This problem of measurability is linked to the existence of a reference standard. Therefore it
is possible to see the necessity to implement national qualifications frameworks and a system of standards in
order to support the strategy to build the European permanent learning area and to enable referencing to the
EQF.This does not mean a standardized procedure to set standards at a European level.

The most recent European documents do not provide a shared definition of 'standard'. In the following
paragraphs we present a review of the variety of European references to the standards system. The
documents taken into consideration are the main official documents (related to EQF, ECVET, key
6
competences), the main preliminary documents and other sources e.g. the CEDEFOP glossary .

In these documents the different standards are sometimes explicitly mentioned, illustrated, proposed or
required (for instance, to the Member States), in other cases they are only referred to or supposed. This
suggests that different standards are given different weightings.

Firstly we provide an analysis of the definitions of standards in the two main official documents (related to
EQF and ECVET). Afterwards, we present definitions of the system of standards in the preliminary
documents and in other sources.

6.1 Standards within EQF and ECVET documents

6.1.1 European Qualification Framework (EQF)

In the document Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council 2008 on the establishment
of the European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning, (2008/C 111/01), the word standard appears
twice:

When defining qualification: what it is achieved at the end of a process that ends when a competent
body determines that an individual has achieved learning outcomes to given standards.
In Annex III, where the Principles for Quality Assurance in Education and Training are recalled. It is
stated that this quality assurance systems must include clear and measurable objectives and
standards after:
o having underlined that the system of quality assurance must be an integral part of the
internal system of the management of all the training bodies, at all levels;
o having stressed that it must enclose the following: context, inputs, processes, outputs and
emphasise the learning results,
Here a wide range of standards are necessary for every single part of the quality assurance system; from the
standard related to process to the standard necessary to measure learning results. These are two very

6
Main reference documents:
RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 23 April 2008 on the establishment of
the European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning, (2008/C 111/01)
Proposal for a RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on the establishment of
the European Credit system for Vocational Education and Training (ECVET), COM(2008) 180 final
Proposal for a RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on key competences for
lifelong learning, COM(2005) 548 final
Terminology of vocational training policy - A multilingual glossary for an enlarged Europe (CE-DEFOP 2004)
ENHANCED EUROPEAN COOPERATION IN VOCATIONAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING (ECVET), THE COPENHAGEN
PROCESS, First Report of the Technical Working Group on Credit Transfer in VET, October 2003
ENHANCED EUROPEAN COOPERATION IN VOCATIONAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING (ECVET), Principles and
reference framework for implementation, 24 September 2004
Preliminary document of the EQF experts meeting, 1 April 2005 (foko6_neues-aus-europa_10_eqf-working-paper)
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Towards a European qualifications framework for lifelong learning,
SEC(2005) 957

29
different meanings of the word standard. The connection between standards and process is used to refer to
a standardised process (that is an accepted and set way of doing something in order to ensure consistency
and coherence)

6.1.2. European Credit system for Vocational Education and Training (ECVET)
In the document Proposal for a Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the
establishment of the European Credit system for Vocational Education and Training (ECVET), COM(2008)
180 final, the word standard appears twice.

To illustrate the use of ECVET with regards to non-formal and informal learning realised through
different kinds of learning programmes and modules, like the standardised training programmes.
Where qualifications are described in terms of units of learning outcomes. Learning outcomes
expected for the award of a qualification can be listed in a catalogue of units, a qualification
standard or any other memorandum on qualification.

Therefore, it is considered necessary to have a learning outcomes based standard to define or describe
qualifications.

Also for ECVET it is interesting to highlight that the concept of standards is largely connected with the quality
assurance procedures.

6.2 The standards system within other European sources

If we consider the documentation examined so far it is possible to understand the need to define the
standards at a national level.

All of the documentation is part of the system of standards of which the following table provides a summary:

Table I: Standards system within all European sources

n. STANDARDS

Standards related to the representation of the labour market, like labour markets segments
7
1. (occupational profiles, vocational families) . It is recalled the usefulness of the shared classification
systems.
2. National Qualification Framework (NQF).
3. National Qualification System (NQS).
Learning outcomes descriptors referred to the single qualifications following a standardised
typology (knowledge, skills and competences).
N.B.
- It is important to remember that in Europe there are learning outcomes descriptors referred to
4. permanent learning key competences.
- Learning outcomes of a qualification can be listed in a catalogue of units, a qualification standard
or any other memorandum on qualification. The preference is given to the units. The description of
learning outcomes units can vary according to the qualifications system and the procedures of the
competent body.
Credit System (quantitative, based on credit points), including the standardised procedures for their
5.
attribution.
Standards for the evaluation of learning outcomes achievement (Standards, defined as learning
6. outcomes, for learning assessment; competent body determines that an individual has achieved
learning outcomes to given standards).
Standardised procedures for learning outcomes evaluation (Procedures for learning
7.
assessment).
Standardised procedures for learning outcomes validation (Procedures for validating learning
8.
outcomes).

7
Learning outcomes are considered in relation to reference levels, qualification frameworks and labour markets segments
(occupational profiles, vocational families): cfr. Preliminary document of the EQF group of experts meeting, 1 April 2005, page 7
(foko6_neues-aus-europa_10_eqf-working-paper.pdf).

30
 Standardised procedures for learning outcomes recognition (in order to capitalize and
accumulate).
N.B.
9. There are procedures and criteria for the definition of mutual trust areas in the cooperation among
different stakeholders involved in education and training.
There are national procedures for the recognition of professional diplomas, certificates and other
qualifications.
10. Quality assurance procedures and improvement procedures.
11. Standards for the definition of training programmes.

If we consider the first action that Member States must undertake when implementing the EQF, it is clear that
first standards must be implemented.

By year 2010 Member States are invited to compare their own National Qualification Systems and
Frameworks to the EQF. The Recommendation defines the NQS as all aspects of a Member States activity
related to the recognition of learning and other mechanisms that link education and training to the labour
market and civil society. These activities include the elaboration and the implementation of institutional
dispositions and processes in the field of:

Quality assurance;
Qualifications evaluation;
Qualifications awarding.

In the outline of the NQF profile, the Recommendation stresses the importance of the validation processes
(building qualification, approval NQS, learning, assessment, evaluation, certification, recognition, awarding)
and the quality assurance of these processes.
Considering that a national qualification system can be made of different sub-systems, those activities based
on the validation processes are specific for each sub-system.

In conclusion, there are many different types and levels of standards (see Figure 10 below). The EQFNET-T
Project has analysed all of these and proposes a model which highlights the system of a Model of Standards
useful and necessary to have in place in order to implement the EQF.

Figure 10 - the different levels of the standards system

31
7. THE CONCEPT OF 'COMPETENT BODY'
This particular concept was not critical for the countries participating to the EQFNET-T Project and therefore
was not subject to a specific analysis; however it was concluded that there are many differences in
understanding at European level of what a competent body is. Even in the final text of the Recommendation
it was not considered necessary to provide a shared definition of this concept.

Instead, as part of the project the concept of competent bodies was explored including looking at the various
processes concerning qualifications, identification, approval, assessment and validation. It was found that in
different countries, what classified those empowered to award qualifications as competent bodies varied.
Qualifications may be awarded by either public bodies (as seems to be in most cases) appointed through the
legal system or by competent private bodies (accredited by national institutions). In fact, as we have seen,
the European definition of qualification does not specify what should be the legal nature of the competent
awarding body.

In conclusion within the countries participating to the EQFNET-T Project the definition of competent bodies
involved in the various processes concerning qualifications, identification, approval, assessment and
validation is variable according to national systems. It will be important to make these systems transparent to
foster mutual recognition.

8. CONCLUSION
These considerations suggest the need for a development of a glossary describing the different words
defined in the European recommendation, where each country could express how they can be applied in
each specific context.

32
 Chapter 2 :

The Impact of

the European Qualifications Framework

33
INTRODUCTION
This chapter outlines the impact that the development of the European Qualifications Framework (EQF) has had
on Ministries and stakeholders within each of the countries participating in the Leonardo da Vinci EQF Network
Testing Project: Belgium; France; Italy; Poland; Romania; Spain; Wales and Scotland. The successful
implementation of the EQF will rely on a wide dissemination of its purpose and its benefits. The study provides a
methodical approach which surveys the impact of the EQF, providing a snapshot of the extent of implementation
and knowledge of the EQF within: Higher Education; vocational education and training, information and
guidance; Ministries of Education; Ministries of Labour; employers; and social partners

The results will provide a baseline on which future surveys can compare progress within each of the participating
countries in the seven critical areas above with regard to: the implementation of the EQF; the level of knowledge
of the EQF; how it is being used or applied by Ministries and stakeholders; ways in which information on the
Framework is being disseminated; and the committees and working groups that have been established to take
forward EQF developments.

The recommendation from the European Parliament in April 2008 was for National Co-ordination Points (NCPs)
to be designated in each country in order to provide support and guidance for the referencing of National
Qualifications Frameworks or national qualifications systems to the EQF. A further remit of the NCP is to
promote the quality and transparency of the relationship between the national qualifications levels and the EQF.
This report examines the progress that has been made towards the establishment of the NCPs in each of the
eight countries involved in the EQF Network and identifies challenges that are faced by some in this regard.

34
1. BELGIUM
In Belgium (French speaking part), the level of knowledge of the EQF in higher education is considered to be
low. The Bologna promoters have set up working groups to take forward the EQF and there is formal
assimilation of EQF levels 6 to 8 to the Bologna process cycles. However there is little or no information on the
dissemination of information on the EQF to the Higher Education sector.

There is greater knowledge of the EQF within Vocational Education and Training (VET) where the aim is to
develop an integrative National Qualifications Framework (NQF) based on Learning Outcomes and generic level
descriptors. The Vademecum Construire un cadre des certifications en cfwb8 has been produced to
disseminate information on the EQF and promote understanding. Within VET the Comit directeur du
Consortium de Validation des Comptences has been charged to take forward the EQF.

Although there is a proposal within the Ministry of Education to link the levels of diplomas to EQF levels, in
general, knowledge of the EQF is low. Stakeholders such as employers, information advice and guidance
services and social partners also have a low level of knowledge of the EQF.

In October 2008 there was no National Co-ordination Point (NCP) in French speaking Belgium. This is due to the
two different approaches that exist within education and training. These are:
For VET and Education for adults, a group is working on a common methodology to refer each qualification to
the EQF levels. This work will result to a referencing approved by all concerned providers. (Definitive referencing
or transitory referencing if the material describing the qualification has to be corrected)

For HE, a formal referencing according to the Bologna levels without describing qualifications in term of learning
outcomes has been done. HE reserves, by law, these levels to HE, what is in contradiction with the position of
VET that may result to a referencing of some qualifications to levels equal or superior to 6.

A meeting of both VET and HE, with general education and IVET, is planned for November 2008 by the Ministry
of Compulsory Education. It is anticipated that National Coordination will be discussed in this meeting but
resolution and agreement may be difficult.

8
cfwb : Communaut franaise Wallonie Bruxelles

35
2. FRANCE
The Commission Nationale de la Certification Professsionnelle (CNCP), the National Commission for
Professional Qualifications, is the representative body for France on the European Commissions Advisory
Group for the Implementation of the EQF. It is the CNCPs responsibility to disseminate the outcomes from the
Advisory Group meetings to inform all the stakeholders at a national level.

For the past 40 years France has used a 5 level Framework to position its qualifications. The EQF will bring
about a great change of understanding about the positioning of the qualifications in another type of hierarchy
concerning competencies, instead of duration of initial training or job categories. The CNCP uses its plenary
sessions and the Working Group set up for the Leonardo da Vinci Funded Project, EQF Network Testing, to
provide information and reflection about the EQF. As the lead body for this Project, the CNCP is responsible for
its management and co-ordination.

In France the three Degree structure proposed for the Higher Education Authorities are: Licence, Master and
Doctorate. Within the Bologna process, these three Degrees automatically align to the EQF at levels 6, 7 and 8
respectively. Currently (July 2008) within the sector there is a period of reflection on whether to propose that the
content of the Degrees is described in terms of competencies. The Higher Education Authorities and Bologna
experts in France have arranged for the CNCP to present information on the EQF at a number of different
meetings, both at a national and a regional level. The CNCP also provides information on the EQF at a local
level.

Within Vocational Education and Training (VET) the CNCP has been invited by a number of different VET
Authorities to present on the EQF. These invitations have been at both national and sectoral level (for
inspectors, teachers etc). By invitation CNCP has presented information on the EQF to committees of the
Ministries of Education and of Labour both at a national and sectoral level eg for inspectors and teachers. It has
also been invited to present on the EQF to national and sectoral committees of representatives of employers.
A working group has been constituted with representatives from VET stakeholders, employers, officials from
different ministries including the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Labour, social partners and with
9
statistics institutions in order to develop a common methodology for all French sub-systems, including Higher
Education, to: link the National Qualifications Framework (NQF) to the EQF; to disseminate information; and to
promote understanding of the EQF within VET.

Stakeholders involved in the working group have followed the development of the EQF and participated in the
EQF consultation since 2005. They are now stakeholders of the national meetings of the project and they
organise the dissemination of information for their own institution.

Through these communication mechanisms there is an increased knowledge and understanding of the EQF
within Ministries and other social partners such as training centres and Chambers of Commerce.

In France, one of the main tools for guidance are the CNCP website and the Repertoire National des
Certifications Professionnelles (RNCP), which is a common index for all qualifications. The principal source for
the dissemination of information on the EQF is that which is produced for the CNCP website. When the
referencing of the NQF to the EQF is complete, the EQF levels will be included on the qualifications held in the
RNCP. At the European level, the CNCP is linked to different guidance institutions involved in mobility eg
NARIC, Euroguidance, Eures.

Since the creation of the CNCP in 2002 most stakeholders now consider the CNCP as a reference point for
qualifications (in French certification). Recent reports made by experts for the first minister or the French
Parliament connect CNCP to the non formal and informal learning outcomes recognition and it has been
suggested that regulation in this field is given a more important role.

9
French Eurostat referent.

36
The CNCP was identified by the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Labour as the NCP because this
Commission was the only one structure integrating all kinds of official qualifications in a register. The Law
creating the CNCP in 2002 indicates that one of its missions relates to the European approach about
transparency of qualifications.

With regard to the setting up of the NCP, the main obstacle that has been met concerns the official designation
of the CNCP as the NCP because this designation is implicit and is not official it is the same problem for the
designation as National Reference Point (NRP) for Europass. This poses some challenges as a non-official
designation does not allow the CNCP to get additional financial and/or human resources to take forward this
mission in the most effective way to achieve optimum efficiency.

37
3. ITALY
The European process leading up to the Recommendation on the EQF entered into force on 23 April 2008 and
the related drafting of a common approach for the transfer of learning outcomes from one system to another
has had a major impact in Italy in terms of policy actions to bring the Italian system into line with joint European
decisions.

Italy has not only actively participated in the European cooperation process on the EQF, but has also launched a
complex internal process (in which National Institutions, Regional Authorities and Social Partners are taking part)
to build a national standards system based on the concept of learning outcomes and aimed at creating a
common national qualifications framework. This is the core of a vast reform programme that will fundamentally
reorganise the supply of training in Italy by adding real value to learning outcomes regardless of how and where
these outcomes are achieved. The national qualifications system, now under construction, will provide a
homogenous, interrelated and permeable framework to meet the diverse needs of the population, both young
and old, and will facilitate the transition between different systems, particularly between education/training and
employment systems. This is the only means to foster the progressive transfer between national qualification
levels (from compulsory schooling to university) and a correlation with the levels related to the EQF.
Italy has complied with the EU's request to implement a European Qualifications Framework by setting up, in
2006, the Tavolo Unico Nazionale (National Table of Standards), a Committee for the construction of a national
system of minimum occupational, training and certification standards promoted by the Ministry of Labour.
In addition to the Ministry of Labour, other actors/ areas involved: the Ministry of Education, the Ministry for
Universities and Research, the Italian Regions Co-ordination Agency, Regional Authorities and Social Partners.
The approach adopted is based on maintaining a relationship of cooperation and sharing between the various
key actors involved in the building of the national framework.

The construction of a national system of minimum occupational, training and certification standards process
should essentially lead to the achievement of two basic objectives: on one hand, enhancing the experiences
carried out so far at national and regional levels by institutions and Social Partners; on the other, incorporating
the development of these experiences within the framework of principles and tools adopted by the EQF, with a
view to building systems that respond to the requirements of an inclusive, cohesive and competitive society
within the European learning space.
As things stand, the National Table has carried out its first action, which was completed in May 2007, aimed at
recognising/cataloguing all the institutional and social directories created in recent years in Italy concerning
occupational standards (and regarded as the first step towards building a National Framework). In Italy, more
than in other countries, the construction of a national framework involves an additional step, i.e. prior integration
of the different frameworks existing at the regional level. Moreover, the methodological framework, lines of
operation, and database/IT system for building the national occupational standards system have been
developed and validated.

These methodological and support tools are implementing by producing occupational standards for two
professional sectors of the economy (tourism and metalworking) with the help and the active participation of
Sectoral Committees consisting of representatives and privileged experts of Social Partners (in charge of
validating the methodological framework to build standards). By 2010, this phase will be followed by the
finalisation of the methodology and support tools (e.g., lines of operation and IT platform) and the production of
occupational standards for all the professional branches of the economy. Afterwards, the National Table will
also implement training and skill-certification standards in order to creating a certification system in which every
citizen and worker can have their competences recognised regardless of how and where they were acquired,
and to promote a quality-based training system consistent with European recommendations and expectations
regarding transparency and mobility.
There has not been any obstacles to the formation of the National Co-ordination Point. The Ministry of Labour
and the Ministry of Education, University and Research have agreed to designate ISFOL as the Italian NCP. A
formal designation will be effected shortly. In the case of a designation of NCP it will be necessary to clearly
identify its functions and responsibilities and its relation to other reference points such as: National Europass
Centres (NEC), the National Reference Points for Vocational Qualifications and the Leonardo da Vinci national
Agencies.

38
4. POLAND
Within its `Operational Programme Human Resources 2007-2013 Poland plans to develop and implement a
National Qualifications System that would be part of the National Qualifications Framework related to the EQF
and solutions enabling lifelong learning and the recognition of formal, non-formal and informal qualifications.
This will begin in the autumn 2008 with analytical and research activities. Experts within the Ministry of National
Education who are leading this development have a high level of knowledge and understanding of the EQF.

Universities and polytechnics already participate in Bologna Process and have implemented the Framework for
Qualifications of the European Higher Education Area (FQEHEA) and the European Credit Transfer and
Accumulation System (ECTS). According to agreements of the Bologna Process, higher education in Poland is
related to the four highest levels of the EQF:

Level 5 Teacher Training Colleges at Bachelors level;

Level 6 qualifications of the first cycle (Bachelor);
Level 7 qualifications of the second cycle (Master);
Level 8 qualifications of the third cycle (PhD).

Universities also issue the Diploma Supplement. However in higher education there is very little knowledge of
the European Qualification Framework (EQF).

Only a small group of experts within Vocational Education and Training (VET) currently have knowledge and
understanding of the EQF. A number of conferences have been held to disseminate information and to inform
the sector about the EQF. Examples of these are: the National occupational qualification standards the way to
build National Qualification Framework organized by the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (September 2006)
and the Peer learning activity on National Qualifications Frameworks organised by the Ministry of National
Education.

Within the Information, Advice and Guidance (IAG) sector and social partners although knowledge of the EQF is
low there is some general information about the use of the EQF in the recognition of informal and non-formal
qualifications and to increase vocational mobility in Europe.

The wider dissemination of knowledge on EQF is planned after developing the model of National Qualification
Framework in `Operational Programme Human Resources 2007-2013.

In Poland at the time of writing (October 2008) there was no National Coordination Point (NCP). The Ministry of
National Education, responsible for work on the National Qualifications Framework, has not established the NCP
and there is no information available about how the NCP will be established. However as Poland has signalled
its intention to develop an NQF which will be linked to the operational programme Human Capital 2007-2013, it
may also be the intention to establish the National Coordination Point at this time.

39
5. ROMANIA
In Romania the National Authority for Qualifications (NAQ) is creating a National Framework of Qualifications.
The National Agency for Qualifications in Higher Education (HE) is responsible for HE qualifications within the
NQF context.

The EQF is known in higher education and a methodology was developed to describe the HE qualifications
based on learning outcomes at EQF levels 6, 7 and 8. The National Agency for Qualifications in HE set up
groups to develop qualifications in HE and disseminated information in conferences, seminars and publications.
The National Agency for Qualifications in HE is co-operating with the National Authority for Qualifications (NAQ)
The EQF is well known in VET and qualifications are developed or revised in accordance with EQF descriptors.
Common principles for Quality Assurance in VET are implemented through the National Quality Assurance
Framework. Information on VET was disseminated via conferences, seminars and publications. In order to take
forward the EQF within VET sectoral committees were established supported by NAQ. They have responsibility
to design the sectors strategy for labour force development and validation of professional qualifications for EQF
Levels 1 to 5.

The Ministry of Education has set up working groups to define the initial VET qualifications. These are co-
ordinated by the National Centre for VET Development. The Ministry of Labour is responsible for continuous
vocational training (CVT) for adults and is working with the Ministry of Education to implement the NQF. The
National Agency for HE Qualifications has also been established. EQF principles and key issues are operational
in TVET - technical and vocational education and training, meaning initial VET. The qualifications descriptions
relating to the EQF are more advanced in initial VET as the descriptors for different sectors are based on EQF
Levels 1 to 5. For academic qualifications the debates are on-going.

NAQ is supporting the sectoral committees development which are tripartite bodies involving employers
organisations, trade unions and government.
Employers organisations have different levels of knowledge related to EQF. The level of understanding depends
on their policy for HR development and interest for cooperation in the sector. Compared to individual Social
Partners, knowledge and understanding of the EQF is more advanced in sectoral committees supported by
NAQ, formed by employers associations and trade unions representatives. To take forward the EQF working
groups from the sectoral committees were created to design new qualifications or revise existing ones

EQF was used in designing career pathways and recognition of learning in different contexts. However
knowledge of the EQF in the IAG sectors is still limited. Counselling and guidance activities continue to focus on
career progression and lifelong learning. The EQF will facilitate a better understanding of careers pathways and
the recognition of competencies obtained in different contexts.
Information on the EQF is disseminated to all sectors via conferences, seminar, focus groups and working
groups.

In Romania, the National Adult Training Board has been established by law as having the role of the National
Authority for Qualifications. This authority refers only to professional qualifications below Higher Education level.
The Government Decision established that the National Agency for Qualifications in Higher Education and
partnership with the economic and social environment is the national authority to establish the National
Framework for Qualifications in Higher Education.

This brings some challenges with regard to the establishment of the NCP as the two authorities are not well
correlated at least to use the same principles to define qualifications in order to allow mobility and career
pathways
In addition the two institutions will each develop a Register for qualifications and it is not clear whether the same
methodology will be used in order to ensure coherence. A further complication is that it is not yet envisaged what
will happen with qualifications obtained in academic studies, not VET. For these three reasons neither of these
two authorities, the National Authority for Qualification (NAQ) and the Agency for Qualifications in HE, can take
on the role of the NCP at the moment and it is not clear which organisation will take on this role. If it is to be the
NAQ, new law changes will be needed.

40
6. SPAIN
Within higher education in Spain priority is given to the implementation of the National Qualifications Framework
European Higher Education Area (NQF- EHEA) as this is considered to be more responsive than the EQF to
the current needs of the higher education sector. In July 2008, new legislation states that the EQF should be
used in the national system within the new departments and programmes within the Organic Structure of the
Ministry of Science and Innovation and the Ministry of Education, Social Policy and Sport. A number of
committees and working groups have been established to take forward the implementation of the NQF-EHEA:
National Committee; Working Group for the implementation of the NQF-EHEA; working groups by knowledge
domain; proposals for the elaboration of the NQF EHEA (see RD 1183/2008 on Basic Organic Structure of
Ministry of Science and Innovation).

The passing of Law 5/2002 on Qualifications and VET has given rise to the creation of the National System of
Qualifications and Vocational Training. The National Catalogue of Professional Qualifications and Associated
Modular Catalogue of VET have been established as the institutional backbone of the system and a `matching
exercise has been carried out between the National Catalogue of Professional Qualifications and the EQF.
There are two main channels of communication for the dissemination of information on the EQF: the General
Council of Vocational Training (the advisory body on VET matters); and working groups for the implementation
and development of the National Catalogue of Professional Qualifications. The General Council of Vocational
Training has established a working group to take forward ECVET, the EQF and other related issues.

It is too soon to estimate the level of knowledge of the EQF within agencies for information, advice and
guidance. However this is being promoted through websites, conferences and projects.

In General Education System, at the non-university levels, explicit reference is made to EQF in the Royal Decree
(RD) on the organisation of middle and higher VET cycles (Technician and Advanced Technician Degrees).
Also similar reference is made to the EQF on both the RD on Training for Employment and on the Certificates of
Professional Standards. The EQF is foreseen as the European reference point within the national levels for
professional qualifications for VET titles/diplomas, as well as for the Vocational Initiation Programmes (PCPI),
designed by the Education Administrations at national and regional level. Within the Catalogue of Professional
Qualifications the EQF is quoted in the context of transparency and mobility. There are Ministries involved in
EQF projects and the Ministry of Education supports websites, conferences and projects that disseminate
information on and promote the understanding of the EQF.

The EQF is being promoted to employers and social partners through participation in advisory bodies such as
the General Council of Vocational Training and through transnational projects at sector level.

There is a good level of knowledge and understanding of the EQF in the institutions and organisations
responsible for the NQF EHEA. Within the National System of Qualifications and VET, INCUAL the National
Institute of Qualifications is the technical agency responsible for defining, preparing and maintaining the National
Catalogue of Professional Qualifications and Associated Modular Training Catalogue.and the EQF. A NQF
encompassing the eight levels of EQF will be considered once the proposals for the NQF-EHEA will be adopted.
Information on the EQF is disseminated via EQF projects and publications and further information on EQF
developments in Spain can be accessed via the INCUAL website at www.mec.es/educa/incual.

Co-ordination exists within the different subsystems: General Academics, VET and University. The Spanish
General Council of VET and its technical body, the INCUAL, carry out the coordination for VET. There is also
University Coordination Council for Higher Education. General Academics follows its own rules.

However at the time of writing (October 2008) there is no National Co-ordination Point (NCP) in Spain and there
is no information available about how this will be established.

One of the main obstacles to the establishment of an NCP is the coordination that would be required as its
establishment would involve a lot of stakeholders. In addition to the co-ordination required, there is the additional
challenge which arises from the different approaches adopted by the various stakeholders to terms like

41
`competences or `learning outcomes. These obstacles could be overcome by taking measures to ensure
mutual trust and follow procedures to reinforce and support the body, that in the future, could deal with the co-
ordination. Another obstacle is the different structures of the three Ministries that would be involved in the
establishment of an NCP: Ministry of Education Social Policy and Sport, Ministry of Labour and Immigration and
Ministry of Science and Innovation.

42
7. SCOTLAND AND WALES
7.1 Scotland

In Scotland the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) is managed by the Scottish Credit and
Qualifications Framework Partnership, a company limited by guarantee and a registered charity. Its members
are the: Association of Scotlands Colleges; Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education; Universities
Scotland; Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) and Scottish Ministers. The SCQF Partnership has a Chief
Executive and a small Executive Team which includes a European and International Officer. The SCQF
Partnership has established a European and International Committee which comprises representatives of higher
education, Scottish Government, Scotlands Colleges and SQA. The remit of this Committee is to provide
support to the SCQF Partnership in terms of co-ordination for requests for SCQF Partnerships involvement,
primarily in Europe, but with a watching brief on international activity. In addition it provides an information
gathering and sharing role.
The Board of the SCQF Partnership established an SCQF Quality Committee in 2007. This Committee is
designated to manage the integrity of the Framework and has the final overview of any work which involves
referencing the SCQF to any other Framework. The SCQF Quality Committee recently established an SCQF to
EQF Referencing Steering Group to oversee the positioning of SCQF Levels to EQF Levels. A consultation on
this will be held with partners and stakeholders between August to November 2008 following which a final
decision will be taken by the SCQF Partnership Board. It is expected that this will be finalised by March 2009.

Knowledge of the EQF is increasing in all sectors and information is disseminated to stakeholders via the SCQF
Website and SCQF publications.

Within Scottish Government, knowledge of the EQF and how it will relate to the SCQF is very good in some
areas within the Ministry, particularly in post school education. The level of knowledge elsewhere is lower. The
EQF itself is not actually being used as yet although officials have built the EQF into future planning as once the
SCQF and other frameworks across Europe are aligned to the EQF this will aid Government policies. The
Scottish Government and the other Governments in the UK established the UK EQF Coordination Group which
has responsibility for coordinating the work in the four nations (Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland)
on aligning the various frameworks in the UK to the EQF. Information on the EQF is disseminated to Ministers
and officials via briefings.

There is a reasonable level of knowledge of the EQF at senior management level within the HE sector. At a
national level, Scottish universities work closely with the Framework for Qualifications of Scottish Education
Institutions and the SCQF. At European level HE works with the Framework for Qualifications for the European
Higher Education Area for transnational mobility of students and graduates. In 2006, Universities Scotland and

43
the QAA Scotland carried out a self-certification of the Framework for Qualifications of Higher Education
Institutions in Scotland against the framework for qualifications of the European Higher Education Area. The
Higher Education Sector expects to use the EQF to help transnational and transectoral mobility. Information is
being disseminated to the Higher Education Sector via the UK Europe Unit and through the Learning and
Teaching Committee of Universities Scotland (the representative body for Higher Education in Scotland).

Within Higher Education no specific committees pertaining to the EQF have been set up and there is no
requirement to do so. This is because the HE sector considers that Scotlands engagement with the EQF should
be undertaken via the SCQF Partnership and its committees and or working groups, on which Higher Education
is represented. Any HE issues or discussions arising from the EQF would fall within the remit of the Learning and
Teaching Committee of Universities Scotland.

The level of knowledge and impact of the EQF within VET is unknown at the present time (July 08). However
SQA and SCQF Partnership Office are receiving enquiries relating to the EQF from employers and colleges.
The majority of the enquiries are in relation to the corresponding EQF level in comparison to the SCQF.

SQA Reference and Certification Board has been alerted to the target date of March 2009 for completion of
referencing of SQA qualifications to the EQF, and to explore how SQA will reference the EQF levels to meet that
target date. SQA will develop a communication plan around any referencing developments.

Careers Scotland, the national all-age guidance provider, is currently working with the SCQF Partnership to
improve the knowledge and understanding of the SCQF for Careers Scotland staff. This includes the
secondment of a member of Careers Scotland staff to the SCQF Partnership. Current level of knowledge and
awareness of the EQF ranges from none to limited. Due to the lack of information and understanding no
committees have been established to take the EQF forward within the sector.

The majority of employers have no knowledge of the EQF. However there is a small proportion of employer
representative groups that have begun to familiarise themselves with the EQF. The landbased sector was
identified as one area of industry that has used the EQF with regard to migrant workers. Although some
employer representative groups have raised the issue of the EQF at employer forums, dissemination of
information on the EQF is not yet at an advanced stage. The Alliance of Sector Skills Councils has drawn up
plans to take forward the use of the EQF at a strategic level. Trade Unions have very little knowledge of the
EQF.

A major strand of work within the Community Learning and Development (CLD) Sector is to address the
recognition and valuing of achievement. SCQF is a core component of this and it is the view of the sector that
understanding of the EQF will stem from a better understanding of the use of the SCQF. It is the view of the CLD
sector that the route to better understanding of the EQF lies through a better understanding and use of the
SCQF.

The Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework Partnership (SCQF Partnership) is the NCP for Scotland and
is a member of the UK EQF Co-ordination Group described below.

7.2 Wales

Credit and Qualifications Framework for Wales

Background
In Wales, there has been over 20 years of recognising rich and diverse learning outside the traditional academic
pathways and leading to the award of credit. In order to maintain support for recognising achievement and
enabling progression the Welsh Assembly Government established the national qualification framework for
Wales in 2002. The Credit and Qualifications Framework for Wales (CQFW) is an overarching meta framework
including three main pillars of learning:

Higher education;
Regulated Academic and Vocational Learning - predominantly used in Schools and College; and

44
Quality Assured Lifelong Learning informal and non formal learning, company training and continuous and
professional development.

Figure 11: illustration of the CQFW

Credit
Wales has a credit system based on learning outcomes and level descriptors which can provide an important
tool for personal reward and progression. The aim is to make it as easy as possible for learners to use credit
accumulation to recognise their individual achievement towards progression and, where possible, towards
incremental achievement of relevant qualifications or recognised learning programmes. The publication Credit
and Learning in Wales an Introduction explains that:
Credit is a currency for learning achievement that provides a measure of learning outcomes achievable in
learning time at a given level. An award is made to learners in recognition of the verified achievement of
designated learning outcomes at a specified level
The Credit Framework brings together learning achievements (credit) and the demands made by that learning on
the learner (level). Credit is used to summarise and describe an amount of learning time. In line with other
credit frameworks CQFW awards one credit for every 10 hours of learning time.

45
The CQFW has nine levels as illustrated below.

In Wales, the development of the EQF is welcomed. Given that the guiding principles of the EQF align very
closely with the CQFW we believe we are fortunate to be in a position to move quickly forward with the
implementation of the EQF.
However there are some extensive challenges ahead as illustrated below. Communication, understanding
acceptance and trust are critical. We are at the start and the grid will show there is therefore in given the current
position there is virtually no awareness of the EQF outside the Government policy

The designated NCP in Wales is the Department for Children, Education and Lifelong Learning and Skills and is
a member of the UK EQF Co-ordination Group described below.

National Co-ordination Points in the UK

Wales and Scotland are part of the UK. Implementation of the EQF in the UK has been organised to correspond
to the existence of the range of credit and qualifications frameworks in the UK. Three National Co-ordination
Points (NCPs) have been established across the UK which are:
The Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework Partnership (SCQFP) as the NCP for Scotland to relate the
Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) to the EQF;
Department of Children, Education, Lifelong Learning and Skills (DCELLS) as the NCP for Wales to relate the
Credit and Qualifications Framework for Wales (CQFW) to the EQF; and
The England/ Northern Ireland EQF Referencing Group [jointly managed by Qualifications and Curriculum
Authority (QCA) (England) and Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA) (Northern
Ireland)] as the NCP for England and Northern Ireland to relate the Qualifications and Credit Framework (QCF)
to the EQF.

A UK EQF Coordination Group was established in November 2007 to provide a forum for these three NCPs to
work together to provide a coherent approach to the implementation of the EQF across the UK.

46
CONCLUSION
For the EQF to reach its ambitions of being the reference point for qualifications and to promote the quality and
transparency of this process there are a number of challenges that require to be addressed.

One of the major challenges highlighted by the survey is the lack of communication on the EQF across all
sectors within each of the countries. From the responses received it can be seen that, in general, knowledge and
understanding of the EQF is held by only a small number of experts in each country. It would appear that a
significant amount of work is required to be carried out in all of the countries if the EQF is to be the instrument to
promote the integration of the European labour market, acting as the reference point for different qualifications
systems and frameworks in Europe. In all countries it will be essential to find the means to disseminate
information on and promote the understanding of the EQF to education providers, vocational education and
training, information, advice and guidance services and social partners in order that it can contribute to the
promotion of lifelong learning and enable the employability and mobility of citizens throughout Europe. It has to
be noted that different stakeholder groups may require different levels of information so, in order to promote
understanding there is a need to develop contextual documentation tailored to the different target audiences.

It will also be necessary to develop an understanding of the level and content of qualifications and training
programmes that exist in each country. This will provide signposts particularly to those who provide information
to learners on learning and employment opportunities that may exist within the member states thus supporting
employability and mobility. This is the role of the NCP in each country.

However there appears to be several obstacles to the establishment of the NCPs within half of the countries
involved in Leonardo Network Testing. The existence of the two often distinct and independent systems of HE
and VET, appears to be a major obstacle for the formation of the NCPs. As the NCP is crucial in referencing
NQFs to the EQF and carrying out the communication and dissemination process it will be necessary to clarify
who will take responsibility for this role. This is particularly important due to the high number of stakeholders
within each country that will have an interest in the EQF, each having specific requirements suggesting that
targeted guidance documentation would be advisable. Concern has also been raised regarding the lack of
clarity on the relationship between the Bologna Process for the European Higher Education Area and the EQF
and this needs to be addressed.

The EQF Network Testing has been an excellent resource to support the development of understanding of the
different qualifications across the participating countries within the specified sectors. However, it was only
possible to examine a limited number of occupational sectors in this way and much remains to be done. The
Network also provided an invaluable Forum for discussion, debate and support on the new approach to the
development of qualifications based on competencies/learning outcomes instead of just on academic
knowledge. For these reasons and for the continued development of understanding and mutual trust within all
participating countries expressed the need for the establishment of an EQF Network Testing on a permanent
basis.

47
48
 Chapter 3 :

Reflections

about the implementation

of NQFs

49
1. ANALYSIS OF NATIONAL QUALIFICATION SYSTEMS AND OF
THE EXISTING OR IN BUILDING FRAMEWORKS
Introduction
All countries have a national qualifications system but a national qualifications framework is a more
systematic way of classifying qualifications, usually by a hierarchy of levels. The Recommendation of
the European Parliament and Council on the establishment of the EQF defines a national
qualifications system as:

All aspects of a Member States activity related to the recognition of learning and other mechanisms
that link education and training to the labour market and civil society. This includes the development
and implementation of institutional arrangements and processes relating to quality assurance,
assessment and the award of qualifications. A national qualifications system may be composed of
several subsystems and may include a national qualifications framework.
10
A national qualification system, which can function to integrate various subsystems , tends to exists
as a precursor to development of a national qualifications framework. A NQF is therefore a part of the
system and is defined by the Recommendation as:

an instrument for the classification of qualifications according to a set of criteria for specified levels of
learning achieved. This aims to integrate and coordinate national qualifications subsystems and
improve the transparency, access, progression and quality of qualifications in relation to the labour
market and civil society

It is possible for a NQF to act as a regulating instrument across the subsystems, aiming to link
qualifications to a set of levels against a set of criteria based on learning outcomes. This linking of
qualifications to a framework of levels may inadvertently challenge existing implicit classifications of
qualifications and may create changes perceived as challenges for the competent authorities of the
different subsystems. The implementation of a NQF may therefore experience resistance from
subsystems which can take time to overcome.

The implementation of a NQF is therefore not only a technical exercise in defining criteria for the
linking to the levels of a framework. It is also often challenging for the existing qualification systems.
The success of the implementation of a national framework can often depend on the political intention
shared by the competent authorities of the subsystems and therefore it is important that the aims of
the framework are shared by the subsystems in order to ensure transparency of qualifications.

In light of these challenges it was decided that it would be beneficial to analyse the existing
subsystems in the different countries participating to the project with the aim of identifying the enablers
and barriers to implementing an NQF at a political and organisational level. The analysis which took
place has taken into account all of the aspects of the national qualification systems: the involvement of
the different competent authorities in the different steps to define, organise and asses a qualification:
the design of the qualification, the assessment process and the recognition procedures.

10
A typology of national qualifications frameworks can be found in the annex to this chapter

50
Synthesis of the first phase of the study

Belgium (French NQF) France Italy Poland

State of NQF
In building Set up In building In building
Typology of NQF*
Now : Multiple framework explicit Now : multiple frameworks, all Now : multiple framework : M Now: multiple systems
for HE, IVET and education for the qualifications are Of Education; M. of Labour -
adults, implicit for CVET integrated in the same learning Regions; Universities; other Future: towards an integrating
Future : integrating framework if domains Ministries11 framework
HE dont prevent the Future : Integrating framework
development Future: policy issue towards
an integrating framework
Types of Qualifications *
Academic/general VET Vocational and HEVET VET Vocational and HEVET VET Vocational and HEVET
VET Vocational and HEVET HE General qualifications
Routes of obtaining the Qualification*
Initial Training Initial Training Initial Training Initial Training
Continuing education + Non Continuing education + Non Continuing education + Non Continuing education + Non
formal and informal learning formal and informal learning formal and informal learning formal and informal learning
recognition recognition recognition recognition
Apprenticeship/ alternative12 Apprenticeship/ alternative Apprenticeship/ alternative Apprenticeship/ alternative
Levels grid*
Future : 8 EQF levels Now : Two 5 levels grids Now: 5 levels of the European 5 levels
according to the authorities in directive 1985
charge of (following the Future: EQF levels and Dublin
Bologna cycles or following the levels
level of responsibility in the
jobs) The sectoral
qualifications are actually not
linked to a level grid
future : May be one for all in
debate
Public authorities in charge of the process: from building to delivering the qualifications
Min Education Min Education Min Education Min National Education
Other ministries Min Labour Other ministries Min of Labour and Social
regions Other ministries regions Policies
Other ministries
Private authorities in charge of the process: from building to delivering the qualifications
Branches (social partners) and Branches (if there is an Branches (social partners)
private organisations after agreement with the national or
agreement from the CNCP regional bodies)
NQF Support
In project for VET : RNCP Now: different subsystems 1. Modular curricula
SFMQ (Service francophone des Repertoire National de repertoires 2. National occupationl
Mtiers et Qualifications) Certifications Professionnelles In the future : an integrated qualification standards
national repertoire
Organisation in charge of NQF support
CNCP ISFOL
Institution in charge of the NQF settlement
1st phase : Groupe Interd- CNCP composed with 16 Ministry of labour with a - Ministry of National
artemental de Haut niveau ministries, social partners, committee composed by M. of Education
Now, for VET : CODI (Comit regions... Education, Universities, - Ministry of Labour and social
directeur du Consortium de Regions and SP Policies
Validation des Comptences)
Legal texts
Law : 17.01.2002 -Law 30/2003 Law about educational system
In project and discussion
-Agreement 21/07/1995
ML/MEN/Regions/SP (2006)
-Proposal of a new law of
lifelong learning approved by
Council of ministries (2007)

11
Italy: in a first phase the Universities agree with a separate frame related to the Bologna process and Dublin descriptors; now
a National Table (Committee) is discussing about the integration.

12
Apprenticeship: systematic, long-term training alternative periods in a school or training centre and at the workplace; the
apprentice is contractually linked to the employer and receive remuneration (wage or allowance). The employer assumes
responsibility for providing the trainee with training leading to a specific occupation. Source: Cedefop, 2003
Alternance training: education or training alternating periods in a school or training centre and in the workplace. The
alternance scheme can take place on a weekly, monthly or yearly basis depending on the country. Participants are not
contractually linked to the employer where they do their practice, nor do their generally receive remuneration (unlike
apprentices). Source: Cedefop, 2003

51
1
Romania Spain Scotland Wales
State of NQF
In building Set up Set up Set up
Typology of NQF*
Development the bilan of The Spanish NQF is the The SCQF is an inclusive The Credit and Qualifications
qualifications and competencies National System for integrated framework comprising Framework for Wales was
available at the labour market in Qualifications and VET (19 of constituent frameworks for Adopted by the Welsh
Poland and the model of NQF June 2002). It consists of Higher Education, Scottish Assembly Government (WAG)
Development of NQF (2009-2010) instruments and actions which Vocational Education and the in 2002. It is a fully inclusive
Building of National Qualification are necessary to promote and Scottish Qualifications Authority meta framework which
System (2011-2013) develop the integration of VET, (SQA). The Framework includes includes academic and
as well as to assess and both formal (academic and vocational; all higher
accredit professional vocational) and non-formal education; Initial Training;
competencies. learning and all use the same Community Training and
Instruments: level descriptors to allocate level Quality Assured Lifelong
-National Catalogue of and credit. Learning (non-formal and
Professional Qualifications and informal learning).
Modular Catalogue of VET There are broadly three pillars
-Information and Guidance of learning all discrete with their
concerning VET and own quality assurance
Employment procedures. All the three pillars
-Procedures to recognize, use the same levels and credit
assess, accredit and register principles
the professional qualifications
-Assessment and quality
improvement of the system
Types of Qualifications*
VET Vocational and HEVET VET Vocational and HEVET Academic/general Academic/general
HE VET Vocational and HEVET VET Vocational and HEVET
HE - Currently others HE
Routes of obtaining the Qualification*
Initial Training Initial Training Initial Training Initial Training
Continuing education + Non Continuing education + Non Continuing education + Non Continuing education + Non
formal and informal learning formal and informal learning formal and informal learning formal and informal learning
recognition recognition recognition recognition
Apprenticeship/ alternative Apprenticeship/ alternative Apprenticeship/ alternative
Levels grid*
Now : 5 levels 5 levels 12 levels Nine - Entry plus 8
Public authorities in charge of the process: from building to delivering the qualifications
Min Education Min Education Education and Lifelong Learning In Wales Education and
Min Labour Min labour Department Labour the same
Other ministries
Private authorities in charge of the process: from building to delivering the qualification)
Private organisations The SCQF Partnership Board National Occupational
comprises senior representatives Standards and the Sector Skills
from the Quality Assurance Council play a critical role in
Agency for Higher Education, developing qualifications
Universities Scotland, Scottish In Wales 120 regulated
Government, Scotlands Colleges awarding bodies private
and the Scottish Qualifications concerns are responsible for
Authority developing and quality assuring
the issuing of certification
NQF Support
National Register for Catalogue of Professional The SCQF Partnership has been The CQFW has a manual ,
Qualifications to be developed Qualifications CNCP and set up to do this. The SCQF has web site and extensive
CMFP Modular Catalogue of a manual, website and extensive publicity material
VET publicity materials.
Organisation in charge of NQF support
The SCQF Partnership The CQFW team
Institution in charge of the NQF settlement
National Authority for INCUAL as the technical body As above Welsh Assembly
Qualifications, Sectoral of the General Council of VET Government and the Higher
Committees ACPART (Agency for Education Funding Council
Qualifications in HE) for Wales (HEFCW)
Legal texts
Law 132/ 1999 modified by Law Spanish Organic Act 5/2002 Memorandum and Articles of Quality Assurance Agency
559/2004 regarding the setting up (19-06-2002 Association for the SCQF Framework for Higher
and functioning of National Adult Partnership. Education Qualifications
Training Board acting as National (FHEQ)
Authority for Qualifications Statutory Regulations of
Gov. Decision 1357/2005 Qualification
regarding the setting up and
functioning of ACPART (National
Agency for Qualifications in HE
and Partnership with Economic
and Social Environment)

52
Summary of first phase of analysis

The status of each country with regard to national qualifications frameworks was found to vary
enormously by:

The type of framework:

o in Spain, the framework is limited to VET and HE VET;

o the Scottish one is an integrative framework;
o the Welsh one is a meta-framework;
o in France, it is a multiple framework with an intention to build an integrative one;
o frameworks development will be integrative; however in Belgium, because the position of
HE, it could result in a multiple framework (a double one).

The subsystems of a national qualifications system:

o Frequent inclusion of VET and HE VET

o Academic qualifications are present only in Scotland and Wales and are formally in a
separate framework in Belgium.

Therefore a common trend has been observed:

With the exceptions of the Scottish integrative framework and the Welsh meta framework one, which
both integrate academic qualifications, frameworks are developing principally in VET and HE VET
fields, and are generally experiencing difficulty in including academic qualifications. An example from
Belgium is used in the table below to illustrate this difficulty.

Belgium- (French speaking part)

Despite a political intention to develop an integrative framework, the Higher Education sector
(including academic qualifications and HE VET ones) has formally constituted, by decree, their own
framework on the basis of the compatibility of the EQF levels 6 to 8 with the Qualifications
Framework for the European Higher Education Area as part of the Bologna process. The legal text
reserves these levels to HE, excluding any other qualifications with a possibility of legal sanctions
in case of non respect of the decree.

The notions of qualification and of national qualification framework (for levels 6 to 8) are defined
in the decree in a restrictive way: Qualification is restricted to the certificates and diplomas of the
Higher Education Institutions and the framework is limited to the Higher Education subsystem
(excluding VET of upper levels).

This position is in opposition with the building of a framework for Continuing Vocational Education
and Training (CVET) and Education for adults (with a possibility to extend to Initial Vocational
Education and Training (IVET)) based on a common methodology for the linking to the 8 levels of
the EQF. The level of each qualification will need to be defined separately according the
methodology and will rely on consultation with and an agreement between stakeholders such as
providers. Once agreed, this methodology will better enable a linkage between VET qualifications
that are equal to levels 6 and above in the EQF.

The position of HE therefore appears to advocate maintaining the existing situation in contradiction
with the aim of a national qualifications framework which is to coordinate and to integrate various
subsystems at the national level.

53
Conclusion of the first phase of analysis

Analysis of existing national systems and frameworks (both established and in development) finds that
the aims of a NQF are not shared in the same way across all subsystems. In fact, in all countries, the
drive to develop a framework is most strongly encountered in the field of in VET and HE VET.

General education seems to be less concerned with the development of or inclusion within a national
framework. This could be because the aims of transparency and mobility are less relevant in the same
way for this subsystem.

The academic field does often not share the wider aims of a NQF. For the academic subsystem, the
goal of transparency and mobility is often restricted to the European field of HE, according to the
Bologna process, without any real intention to build bridges with VET. Even, it was told the intention to
focus highest levels only to academic Higher Education excluding VET beyond level 5 (Belgium).

This conclusion highlights a possible obstacle for the immediate implementation of a meta-framework
or of an integrative one including all subsystems.

54
2. ANALYSIS OF NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS SYSTEMS
PROCESSES: OBSTACLES AND OPPORTUNITIES
Introduction

The more visible component of the EQF is the scale of 8 levels, described in terms of learning
outcomes expressed by knowledge, skills and competencies.

However, this grid representing the framework of levels is only one of the components which
constitute the EQF. Developing transparency and mobility is a key aim of the EQF as outlined in the
Recommendation, however these will only be realised by enabling and improving mutual trust. This
mutual trust implies the following:

having a shared methodology to describe qualifications (independent of the learning pathway)

a shift to learning outcomes
a transparent methodology for the linking of the levels of national qualifications frameworks to the
levels of the EQF.

As seen in Chapter 1, such shared methodologies and understanding of various concepts does not
currently exist across subsystems and countries. The question is therefore whether there is enough of
a common understanding of the definition of learning outcomes and the EQF level descriptors to
create the level of mutual trust required when referencing national systems and frameworks to the
EQF.

This section also addresses whether the descriptions of qualifications in the various national
subsystems create opportunities or obstacles when implementing a NQF and to identify the necessary
steps required to overcome any obstacles.

The analysis which follows explores the many different processes which form part of national
qualifications systems with the aim of identifying obstacles and/or opportunities to implementation.

Analysis of the second and third phase

From the second phase of the study, it has been found that the methodologies used to develop
qualifications are not generally linked to the economic sector concerned. Development is primarily
defined by the authority in charge of the process independent of the sector. As a result of this finding
during the third phase of analysis, systematic descriptions of the process of qualification development
as well as reviews of the authorities in charge of the qualifications development were carried out
according to the various subsystems.

The following tables provide a summary of the qualifications development processes by country.

55
 Authorities in charge of the qualifications development: by subsystem

Country: Belgium
Type of subsystem / Academic/General VET HE VET/HE Apprenticeship/
Steps of building alternance
Building the qualifications Ministry of Education Training providers Ministry of Higher Education Ministry of Education or
goals Ministry of education for IVET regional providers

Content of occupational Ministry of Education Training providers with social Ministry of Higher Education Ministry of Education or
standards partners (if they exist) regional providers with social
CCPQ for IVET13 partners

Training program Competent bodies Training or education Universities Providers

(Pouvoirs providers For Hautes coles : Ministry
organisateurs) of Higher Education (after
concertation)
Assessment procedures Schools Training or education Universities or Hautes Providers
providers coles
Content of the learning - Training or education - Providers
outcomes providers
Content of the component of Schools Training or education Universities or Hautes Providers
the assessment providers coles
Duration of the training Ministry Education Variable (Ministry of education Ministry of Higher Education Ministry of Education or
for IVET) regional providers

13
The CCPQ (Commission communautaire des professions et qualifications) will be replaced by the SFMQ (Service francophone des mtiers et qualifications) competent for IVET, CVET, Education
for adults and Validation des competences. Occupational standards will be realised by social partnes and Training standards by Education and training providers.

56
Country : Spain
Type of subsystem / Professional Academic/General: VET: Intermediate VET HE: Degree, VET/HE: Higher VET Apprenticeship/
Qualifications Vocational Initiation Level (CFGM) Postdegree, Ph Level Alternance:
Steps of building Programs (PCPI) Certificates of
Professional
Standards, Continuous
VET
Building the Qualification goals are Education authorities of the Ministry of Education, Universities (verified Ministry of Education, Ministry of Labour, and
qualifications goals built by INCUAL regions and Regional Education by the Ministry of and Regional Education social partners (trade
according to the Authorities Science and Authorities unions, employers
General Council of VET Innovation trough organizations) and
ANECA) enterprises.
Content of occupational INCUAL with sector INCUAL with sector experts, in INCUAL with sector Universities, through INCUAL with sector INCUAL with sector
standards experts, in consultation consultation with stakeholders experts, in consultation competences. experts, in consultation experts, in consultation
with stakeholders including employers, trade with stakeholders with stakeholders with stakeholders
including employers, unions, regional authorities including employers, including employers, including employers,
trade unions, regional and sector administrations. trade unions, regions trade unions, regions trade unions, regions
authorities and sector authorities and sector authorities and sector authorities and sector
administrations. administrations. administrations. administrations.
Training program INCUAL with training Regional educative The Ministry of Every University The Ministry of Ministry of Labour is in
experts, in consultation administrations Education define the taking into account Education define the charge of certificates of
with stakeholders national common the University national common Professional standards.
including employers, training of every Council training of every higher Social agents and the
trade unions, intermediate VET VET diploma and the enterprises are in charge
educational regions diploma and the regional regional educative of the training
authorities and VET educative administrations specialities of continuous
centres. administrations complete complete the program training
the program
Assessment procedures General Council of Regional educative General Council of VET, ANECA and the General Council of VET, General Council of VET,
VET, General State inspectorships General State Council of University Council General State Council of the
Council of Education Education and the Education and the Ministry involved and the
and the Ministry related Ministry related with the Ministry related with the State Foundation for
with the qualification qualification qualification training and employment
Content of the learning INCUAL (Ministry of Regional educative The Ministry of Universities The Ministry of Ministry of Labour is in
outcomes Education) with training administrations Education define the Education define the charge of certificates of
experts, in consultation national common national common professional standards.
with stakeholders learning outcomes of learning outcomes of Social agents and the
including employers, every intermediate VET every higher VET enterprises are in charge
trade unions, diploma and the regional diploma and the of the training
educational regions educative regional educative specialities of continuous
authorities and VET administrations complete administrations training
centres. them complete them
Content of the INCUAL (Ministry of Regional educative The Ministry of Universities and The Ministry of Ministry of Labour is in
component of the Education) with training administrations Education and the ANECA Education and the charge of certificates of
assessment experts, in consultation regional educative regional educative professional standards.
with stakeholders administrations administrations Social agents and the
including employers, enterprises are in charge

57
Type of subsystem / Professional Academic/General: VET: Intermediate VET HE: Degree, VET/HE: Higher VET Apprenticeship/
Qualifications Vocational Initiation Level (CFGM) Postdegree, Ph Level Alternance:
Steps of building Programs (PCPI) Certificates of
Professional
Standards, Continuous
VET
trade unions, of the training
educational region specialities of continuous
authorities and VET training
centres
Duration of the training Variables 300-1700 h 1000 hours (in general) 2000 hours 240 ECTS 2000 hours The same as each
according to 1-2 years 2 years 120 ECTS 2 years qualification
professional
competences

58
Country: France
Type of subsystem / Academic/General* VET HE VET/HE Apprenticeship/
Steps of building Alternance**
Building the qualifications goals Varied approaches across Team of teachers owning to Team of teachers owning to
the piece ranging from Department of universities Department of universities
centralised (typically through
the relevant ministry or
authorities delivering the
qualification)
Content of occupational Ministry and different Team of teachers owning to Team of teachers owning to
standards authorities delivering the Department of universities Department of universities
qualification, regarding
enquiries about occupations
made which may be made
by resources and consulting
institutions
Training program Ministry and different Team of teachers owning to Team of teachers owning to
authorities in charge of the Department of universities Department of universities
training centers
Assessment procedures Ministry and different Team of teachers owning to Team of teachers owning to
authorities delivering the Department of universities Department of universities
qualification
Content of the learning Ministry and different Team of teachers owning to Team of teachers owning to
outcomes authorities delivering the Department of universities Department of universities
qualification
Content of the component of Ministry and different Team of teachers owning to Team of teachers owning to
the assessment authorities delivering the Department of universities Department of universities
qualification
Duration of the training Ministry and different Team of teachers owning to Team of teachers owning to
authorities in charge of the Department of universities Department of universities
training centers

*The RNCP does not integrate nowadays the general qualifications, that is the reason why the first colomn is not completed for France
** The apprenticeship and the alternance are not specific qualifications, all the qualifications coulb be obtained through a training process organized through amternance or
apprenticeship.

59
Country: Italy
Type of subsystem / General Education VET HE: Degree, Postdegree, Ph VET/HE Apprenticeship/
Steps of building (IFTS) alternance
Building the qualifications National table Committee, The main authorities in charge Ministry of Labour
goals Ministry of Education, (concerning qualifications Ministry of Education, are: the National IFTS Local Authorities
University and Research delivered by Vocational University and Research Committee composed by the Social Partners
Secondary Schools) Ministry of Education, University
Universities and Research the Ministry of
Local Authorities (concerning Labour, Regional Authorities
qualifications delivered by and the Social Partners and the
Regions I and II level IFTS Sector Committees
Qualification) (composed of trained experts
from the Ministry of Education,
University and Research, the
Ministry of Labour, Regions, the
National Association of the
Italian Municipalities, the Italian
Provinces Union, Social
Partners) that entrusted
Regions.
Qualifications are delivered by
Regions
Content of occupational National table Committee Ministry of Labour
standards Ministry of Education, (concerning qualifications Universities The National IFTS Committee Local Authorities
University and Research delivered by Vocational and Social Partners
Secondary Schools) the IFTS Sector Committees

Local Authorities (concerning

qualifications delivered by
Regions I and II level
Qualification)

Training program National table Committee Ministry of Labour

Ministry of Education, (concerning qualifications Universities The National IFTS Committee Local Authorities
University and Research delivered by Vocational and Social Partners
Secondary Schools) the IFTS Sector Committees through Training centres
through Training centres
Local Authorities (concerning
qualifications delivered by
Regions I and II level
Qualification) through Training
centres

Assessment procedures National table Committee Ministry of Labour

Ministry of Education, (concerning qualifications Universities Local Authorities
University and Research delivered by Vocational The National IFTS Committee Social Partners
Secondary Schools) and through Training centres

60
 the IFTS Sector Committees
Local Authorities through Training centres
United Conference State-Regions
(concerning qualifications
delivered by Regions I and II
level Qualification) through
Training centres

Content of the learning National table Committee Ministry of Labour

outcomes Ministry of Education, (concerning qualifications Universities The National IFTS Committee Local Authorities
University and Research delivered by Vocational and Social Partners
Secondary Schools) the IFTS Sector Committees through Training centres
through Training centres
Local Authorities
United Conference State-Regions
(concerning qualifications
delivered by Regions I and II
level Qualification) through
Training centres
Content of the component National table Committee Ministry of Labour
of the assessment Ministry of Education, (concerning qualifications Universities The National IFTS Committee Local Authorities
University and Research delivered by Vocational and Social Partners
Secondary Schools) the IFTS Sector Committees through Training centres
through Training centres
Local Authorities
United Conference State-Regions
(concerning qualifications
delivered by Regions I and II
level Qualification) through
Training centres

Duration of the training National table Committee Ministry of Education, Ministry of Labour
Ministry of Education, (concerning qualifications University and Research The National IFTS Committee
University and Research delivered by Vocational and
Secondary Schools) Universities the IFTS Sector Committees
through Training centres
Local Authorities
United Conference State-Regions
(concerning qualifications
delivered by Regions I and II
level Qualification)

61
Country: Poland
Type of subsystem / Academic/General VET HE VET/HE Apprenticeship/
Steps of building alternance
Building the qualifications Ministry of National Education Ministry of National Ministry of Sciences Ministry of Sciences and Ministry of Labour and
goals Education and Higher Education Higher Education Social Policy
Ministry relevant for the Association Council of
profession Polish Crafts

Content of occupational Central Commission Board Ministry of National Ministry of Sciences Ministry of Sciences and Ministry of Labour and
standards (elaboration) Education and Higher Education Higher Education Social Policy
Ministry of National Ministry relevant for the Association Council of
Education (validation) profession Polish Crafts

Training program Ministry of National Education Ministry of National Ministry of Sciences Ministry of Sciences and Ministry of Labour and
Education and Higher Education Higher Education Social Policy
Ministry relevant for the Association Council of
profession Polish Crafts

Assessment procedures Central Commission Board Central Commission Board Schools Schools Schools
Ministry of Sciences
and Higher Education
Content of the learning Ministry of National District Commission Higher schools Higher schools Association Council of
outcomes Education (decree) Board Polish Crafts
District Commission Board
Content of the component of District Commission Board District Commission Schools Schools Schools
the assessment (written part) Board
Schools (oral part)
Duration of the training Ministry of National Education Ministry of National Ministry of Sciences Ministry of Sciences and Ministry of Labour and
Education and Higher Education Higher Education Social Policy
Ministry relevant for the Association Council of
profession Polish Crafts

62
Country: Romania
Type of subsystem / Academic/General VET HE VET/HE Apprenticeship/
Steps of building alternance
Building the qualifications goals MoERY in consultation with Employers (association in MoERY and Univesties Universities based on the Employers (association in
teachers, curriculum specialists the field) methodology developed by the field)
and education inspectors define the Agency for Development
education goals of Qualifications in HE
Content of occupational Not develped Sectorial Committees Not developed Interested bodies Sectorial Committees
standards

Training program MoERY in consultation with MoERY Universities Universities Employers

teachers, curriculum specialists
and education inspectors
Assessment procedures MoERY in consultation with MoERY and Sectorial Universities Universities Ministry of Labour
teachers, curriculum specialists Committees
and education inspectors
Content of the learning MoERY in consultation with MoERY Universities Universities Sectorial Committees
outcomes teachers, curriculum specialists
and education inspectors
Content of the component of MoERY in consultation with MoERY and Sectorial Universities Universities Ministry of Labour and
the assessment teachers, curriculum specialists Committees Sectorial Committees
and education inspectors
Duration of the training MoERY in consultation with MoERY on the basis of the MoERY and universities MoERY and universities Ministry of Labour
teachers, curriculum specialists qualification level
and education inspectors

63
Country: Scotland
Type of subsystem / Academic/General VET HE VET/HE Apprenticeship/
Steps of building alternance
Building the qualifications Predominantly the National Varied approaches across the Team of teachers owning Team of teachers owning to Industry in liaison with awarding
goals Awarding Body in consultation piece ranging from centralised to Department of Department of universities bodies and others who have a role
with teachers, curriculum (typically through the relevant universities in the vocational area, e.g.
specialists and education ministry or authorities practitioners, professional and
inspectors delivering the qualification) regulatory bodies, trades unions
Content of occupational Qualification standards in the Ministry and different Team of teachers owning Team of teachers owning to Industry in liaison with awarding
standards general sector are developed authorities delivering the to Department of Department of universities bodies and others who have a role
by awarding bodies. qualification, regarding universities in the vocational area, e.g.
Occupational standards enquiries about occupations practitioners, professional and
mainly used in the vocational made which may be made by regulatory bodies, trades unions
field are set by industry resources and consulting
institutions
Training program Predominantly the National Ministry and different Team of teachers owning Team of teachers owning to Industry in liaison with awarding
Awarding Body in consultation authorities in charge of the to Department of Department of universities bodies and others who have a role
with teachers, curriculum training centers universities in the vocational area, e.g.
specialists and education practitioners, professional and
inspectors regulatory bodies, trades unions
Assessment procedures Predominantly the National Ministry and different Team of teachers owning Team of teachers owning to Industry in liaison with awarding
Awarding Body in consultation authorities delivering the to Department of Department of universities bodies and others who have a role
with teachers, curriculum qualification universities in the vocational area, e.g.
specialists and education practitioners, professional and
inspectors regulatory bodies, trades unions
Content of the learning Predominantly the National Ministry and different Team of teachers owning Team of teachers owning to Industry in liaison with awarding
outcomes Awarding Body in consultation authorities delivering the to Department of Department of universities bodies and others who have a role
with teachers, curriculum qualification universities in the vocational area, e.g.
specialists and education practitioners, professional and
inspectors regulatory bodies, trades unions
Content of the component Predominantly the National Ministry and different Team of teachers owning Team of teachers owning to Industry in liaison with awarding
of the assessment Awarding Body in consultation authorities delivering the to Department of Department of universities bodies and others who have a role
with teachers, curriculum qualification universities in the vocational area, e.g.
specialists and education practitioners, professional and
inspectors regulatory bodies, trades unions
Duration of the training Predominantly the National Ministry and different Team of teachers owning Team of teachers owning to Industry in liaison with awarding
Awarding Body in consultation authorities in charge of the to Department of Department of universities bodies and others who have a role
with teachers, curriculum training centers universities in the vocational area, e.g.
specialists and education practitioners, professional and
inspectors regulatory bodies, trades unions

64
Country: Wales
Type of subsystem / Academic/General VET HE VET/HE Apprenticeship/
Steps of building alternance
Building the qualifications The building of the goals in this area The building of the goals in this Appropriate University Appropriate University The building of the goals
goals is the responsibility of the four major area is the responsibility of the Departments and social Departments and social in this area is the
awarding bodies WJEC, AQA, 118 awarding bodies working partners, professional partners , professional responsibility of the118
OCR, Edexcel and quality assured closely with the Sector Skills bodies and industry. bodies and industry. Quality major awarding bodies
through the Qualification Regulator Councils and quality assured Quality Assured process Assured process by the HE and the Sector Skills
Welsh Assembly Government and through the Qualification by the HE Quality Quality Assurance Agency Councils and quality
DCELLS and QCA in England. Regulator Welsh Assembly Assurance Agency (QAA). (QAA) assured through the
Government DCELLS and QCA Qualification Regulator
in England. DCELLS and QCA
Content of occupational Very little in this area although National Occupational Standards Appropriate University Appropriate University National Occupational
standards developing more vocational areas for the 26 major sector are Departments and social Departments and social Standards for the 26
within the school curriculum. established and from these partners, professional partners, professional major sector are
standards qualifications are bodies and industry. bodies and industry. Quality established and from
developed as above. Quality Assured process Assured process by the HE these standards
by the HE Quality Quality Assurance Agency qualifications are
Assurance Agency (QAA). (QAA). developed as above.
Training program Not applicable The 118 awarding bodies appoint Appropriate University Appropriate University The 118 awarding bodies
centres to deliver the programmes Departments and social Departments and social appoint centres to deliver
but the guidelines are flexible to partners, professional partners, professional the programmes but the
allow a very varied delivery bodies and industry. bodies and industry. Quality guidelines are flexible to
pattern. Maybe full time or day Quality Assured process Assured process by the HE allow a very varied
release or evening class or block by the HE Quality Quality Assurance Agency delivery pattern. Maybe
study. Assurance Agency (QAA). (QAA). full time or day release or
evening class or block
study.
Assessment procedures Defining assessment procedures is The 118 awarding bodies will Appropriate University Appropriate University The 118 awarding bodies
the responsibility of the four major stipulate the assessment criteria Departments and social Departments and social will stipulate the
awarding bodies. It tends to be and again will be very varied and partners, professional partners, professional assessment criteria and
largely traditional with final year flexible according to the VET area. bodies and industry. bodies and industry. Quality again will be very varied
examinations although nearly all It could involve structured Quality Assured process Assured process by the HE and flexible according to
programmes have some form of on- examinations, on going by the HE Quality Quality Assurance Agency the VET area. It could
going assessment as well. assessment, observation of Assurance Agency (QAA). (QAA). involve structured
practice or group work. examinations, on going
assessment, observation
of practice or group work.
Content of the learning The Learning outcomes approach The content of the learning Appropriate University Appropriate University The content of the
outcomes has not yet been universally adopted outcomes is the responsibility of Departments and social Departments and social learning outcomes is the
in this area. What ever the the 118 awarding bodies working partners, professional partners, professional responsibility of the 118
responsibility of the four major closely with the Sector Skills bodies and industry. bodies and industry. Quality awarding bodies working
awarding bodies Councils and quality assured Quality Assured process Assured process by the HE closely with the Sector
through the Qualification by the HE Quality Quality Assurance Agency Skills Councils and
Regulator Welsh Assembly Assurance Agency (QAA). (QAA). quality assured through
Government DCELLS and QCA the Qualification
in England. Regulator Welsh

65
 Assembly Government
DCELLS and QCA in
England.
Content of the component Defining assessment procedures is The content of the component of Appropriate University Appropriate University The content of the
of the assessment the responsibility of the four major the assessment is the Departments and social Departments and social component of the
awarding bodies. It tends to be responsibility of the 118 awarding partners, professional partners, professional assessment is the
largely traditional with final year bodies working closely with the bodies and industry. bodies and industry. Quality responsibility of the 118
examinations although nearly all Sector Skills Councils and quality Quality Assured process Assured process by the HE awarding bodies working
programmes have some form of on- assured through the Qualification by the HE Quality Quality Assurance Agency closely with the Sector
going assessment as well. Regulator Welsh Assembly Assurance Agency (QAA). (QAA). Skills Councils and
Government DCELLS and QCA quality assured through
in England. the Qualification
Regulator Welsh
Assembly Government
DCELLS and QCA in
England.
Duration of the training Responsibility of the four major The proposed guided learning Appropriate University Appropriate University The proposed guided
awarding bodies with clear hours duration of programme is Departments and social Departments and social learning hours ( duration
government guidelines for full time the responsibility of the 118 partners, professional partners professional of programme) is the
compulsory provision. awarding bodies working closely bodies and industry. bodies and industry. Quality responsibility of the 118
with the Sector Skills Councils and Quality Assured process Assured process by the HE awarding bodies working
quality assured through the by the HE Quality Quality Assurance Agency closely with the Sector
Qualification Regulator Welsh Assurance Agency (QAA). (QAA). Skills Councils and
Assembly Government DCELLS quality assured through
and QCA in England. the Qualification
Regulator Welsh
Assembly Government
DCELLS and QCA in
England.

66
Summary of findings phase two and three
The analysis explored the involvement of professionals in qualification development and found the
following:

Within VET (including VET, HE/VET, apprenticeship), professionals such as employers,

employees, social partners and sometimes users (e.g) social care in Scotland, are involved in
the process of qualification development. The stage at which they are involved varies between
countries and subsystems but they are always involved in defining the professional
competences for the job, often but not always, in collaboration with training providers and the
relevant authorities. The analysis also found that there is a difference between job
descriptions and training descriptions. Finally, the description of the qualification is always
agreed by a competent authority.

For HE and in particular for academic qualifications, professionals are less often, and in some
cases not at all involved in qualification development. Ministries of Education and academic
authorities are the main stakeholders involved in qualification development.

The analysis also sought to explore the extent to which learning outcomes are used in qualification
development:

It is clear that there is a gap between VET and general/academic qualifications, with the
former being more likely to describe qualifications in terms of learning outcomes. An exception
was found in Scotland, where all qualifications, including HE, are described in terms of learning
outcomes.

For VET (and HE/VET), most of the qualifications in most of the countries are described in
relation to the profession. Professional competences are used as the building blocks for defining
the specific learning outcomes related to the profession. Often, these are expressed in terms of
know-how, i.e. what a learner is able to do, including the use of knowledge and skills. The more
transversal competences such as key competences and personal or social competences are often
included within the specific professional competencies and are used to develop the associated
learning outcomes.

Where a competence based approach is used to describe professions, the distinction between
competences and learning outcomes is not always clear and it is not always easy to distinguish
the difference between both concepts in the material describing qualifications. The term
competences is most frequently used as one of the descriptors of learning outcomes (e.g. in
Romania). However, it seems that a distinction is emerging in some countries. For example, in
Belgium there exists a project called Service francophone des mtiers et qualifications where
describing the profession using occupational standards and competences is done by professionals
whereas describing the qualification using learning outcomes, in line with the description of the
profession is done by experts and training providers. These two processes are however done in
collaboration with one other. The description of qualification is however aimed at being
independent of learning pathways.

For general and academic qualifications, the description of the qualifications seems more
strongly linked to the learning process and expressed more in terms of curricula then in terms of
learning outcomes. Teachers are principally involved in the assessment procedures (which are
more or less centralised in the various countries). The mobility document used for HE is the
diploma supplement, which provides information on the content of the learning rather than the
acquired abilities (in terms of knowledge, skills and competences).

With regard to the first stage of qualification development (involvement of professionals), it is possible
to say that the implicit currency of qualifications varies between subsystems:

for VET, the involvement of the professionals ensures the legitimacy with the labour market;

for HE, the currency is linked to the reputation of the diplomas (and to their legal or
negotiated effects), this currency is more social.

67
However, the development of a NQF introduces a new currency, based on a common methodology for
describing qualifications using generic descriptors across the different subsystems. As previously
suggested, this may lead to challenges to existing implicit classifications of qualifications. This is
especially true for subsystems where qualification development is implicitly linked to or gives more
weight to knowledge, for example, than skills or competence since it is the knowledge component
which carries more currency than the others.

This could be an obstacle in the implementation of a NQF since subsystems could be reluctant to
development a NQF because they fear they might lose part of the currency of their qualifications.
However, it could also be an opportunity: if the desire for transparency is shared by all competent
authorities, the implementation of a NQF could be a driver for change in the way that qualifications are
described. These adjustments would also improve the wider quality of the qualifications system,
ensuring greater coherence for the end user.

The challenge is to involve all subsystems in the process.

Conclusion
From this stage of the analysis the project concludes that development of qualifications using learning
outcomes is not consistent across subsystems and is not without barriers and the shift to learning
outcomes is a particular challenge for general and/or academic qualifications.

For general and academic qualifications the implementation of learning outcomes is more complex
than for VET. Qualifications in this subsystem are more frequently described using transversal
competencies and it is more difficult to translate the aims of general education into learning outcomes.
Academic and most HE qualifications do not prepare an individual for a single profession, but to
cluster of professional activities. Therefore reference to a single job profile is inadequate leading to
transversal competences being perceived as more appropriate then specific ones. Added to this, a
competence based approach to qualification description is often feared by academic authorities; since
they fear to loss their academic autonomy through a too strong linkage to the labour market.

The challenge is to find a way to incorporate transversal competences into learning outcomes whilst
describing the qualifications independently of the learning pathway. However, as reported in the first
part of this chapter, this aim is not generally shared by the academic world. Mobility between HE
institutions at European levels is more strongly associated with harmonisation of the structure of
training (common cycles) then by an open transparency of qualifications for lifelong learning. The
object of mobility is not same. For HE it is about the possibility to complete part of a learning pathway
in another country; from a lifelong learning perspective, there is no predefined pathway but instead an
open pathway with the aim of recognising all learning, in all sub-systems; formal, non formal or
informal.

Without sharing the mobility aim between subsystems, general and academic qualifications will remain
more associated with the learning process than to outcomes. Qualification within the academic
subsystem is more frequently associated with the sum of the learning activities than as the results of
them. The shift to learning outcomes is not really a goal for HE and the technical difficulties to define
learning outcomes are greater for them than for VET.

Successfully developing a NQF involving all subsystems needs to go beyond fears and difficulties and
to share a common comprehension of the concepts of qualification and learning outcomes as defined
in Recommendation. However, definitions are not sufficient in themselves to ensure this objective. The
process of the NQF development is a stepping stone to improving this common comprehension, but
only if the aims of the NQF are shared and disseminated at the level of the Education and Training
providers.

68
3. METHODS FOR REFERENCING NQFS TO THE EQF LEVELS
Introduction

In all the countries participating in the project, the process of referencing is inevitable but the
methodology for referencing NQF to the 8 EQF levels is not yet fully defined.

It has been observed that there are three possible ways of referencing:
when a national framework exist, from national framework to national framework (e.g.
Scotland and Wales)
by blocs : linking to EQF levels according to the existent system of making explicit levels of
qualifications (most used methods)
qualification by qualification (this option is taken in Belgium for CVET and for VET and
organised by regions in Italy)

The following tables overleaf provide a summary of how each country intends to reference its national
qualifications system or framework to the EQF.

69
Methods for referencing NQF to the EQF levels by country

1. Ways used or to be used for referencing NQF to the EQF levels for the whole NQF
1 - Way for referencing and Methodology used
2 - Descriptors used and Process
France By blocs for all levels of qualifications except the CQP
A specific approach was set up: close to CNCP through a specific active working group
composed with ministries as social partners. Since next July this group includes statistics
institution in order to have a common methodology for all the French sub-system to link
NQF to EQF

Descriptors used and Process

The levels result from two approaches: an approach linked with a 5 levels nomenclature
(nomenclature of 1969) according to the level of responsibility in the jobs (cf phase 1). As
a result of the harmonization of systems of higher education at European level, some
qualifications delivered by the Universities are identified through their grade or degrees
(reform "LMD" in France). They are classified in 5 levels nomenclature of 1967 in
accordance with their duration of training
Scotland Framework to framework
HE Bologna self-certification criteria
Re the EQF, the SCQF Partnership has recently conducted a piece of research into how
the SCQF might reference to the EQF. The methodology and outcomes of this research
are now subject to national consultation

Descriptors used and Process

There are no separate level descriptors for different sectors.
The approach is to reference framework to framework.
Wales Framework to framework
We are currently carrying out an alignment process of the CQFW levels against the EQF.
It will be carried out on a Framework by Framework Alignment. It will not be approached
qualification by qualification it is too complex with 20,000 potential qualifications within
the framework.
We will look at the level descriptors and have a established methodology in the UK to
look at framework alignment with the current different frameworks in operation.

It is unclear at present what the outcome will be but initial findings are that the CQFW
level descriptors do not match exactly with the EQF levels

Descriptors used and Process

The Welsh Framework has clearly defined level descriptors and programmes within
the framework all have a defined structure with each qualifications having to be
defined in terms of learning outcomes, level on the framework and appropriate
volume of learning (the credit value).
The framework has three pillars of learning:
Higher Education which uses Dublin and Nicats Level descriptors;
General and Vocational uses QCF England Wales and Northern Ireland level
descriptors; and Quality Assured Lifelong Learning which uses QCF England Wales
and Northern Ireland level descriptors.

70
2 - Sub-systems of NQF concerned : HE
1 - Ways used or to be used for referencing NQF to the EQF levels for only
2 Descriptors ans process

1 - Way for referencing and Methodology used

Belgium Sub system concerned : HE
Referencing by blocs
Formal referencing according to Bologna cycles
Levels 6 to 8 reserved by law to HE

Descriptors used and Process

EU EQF descriptors putted in the law, without developing LOs
Process not defined
Depends on Quality assurance process
Italy Sub system concerned : HE: University Education (Istruzione Universitaria) and Higher
Artistic and Musical Education (Alta Formazione Artistica e Musicale
Methodology used : by blocs
Links between the National and the European levels have been established,
respectively:
HE - University Education (Istruzione Universitaria)
The level I University Degree - (Laurea) is associated to the level 6 EQF
The level II University Degree (Laurea Magistrale o Specialistica) is associated to the
level 7 EQF
The Doctorate (Dottorato di ricerca) is associated to the level 8 EQF
HE - Higher Artistic and Musical Education (Alta Formazione Artistica e Musicale)
The Higher Artistic and Musical Education and Training is associated to the level 6
EQF

Descriptors used and Process

European generic descriptors are formally regulated by law and are now used by each
Italian University and HE Institution (see answer to question 4, C). In the Higher Artistic
and Musical Education the reform process has not been definitively implemented yet.
Process : about the HE - University Education, at present each Italian University is
redefining every single qualification issued, by using a standard pattern elaborated by
the Italian Ministry of Education (Ministero dellIstruzione, dell'Universit e della Ricerca
- MIUR). This standard pattern is structured in order to make each qualification defined
by specific descriptors coherent with the European generic descriptors. Descriptions of
each qualification are verified by the National University Council (Consiglio Universitario
Nazionale - CUN), which provides an official decision. On the basis of this specific
decision the University Faculty Board (Consiglio della Facolt of the University)
approves the concerned qualification.

General process: the National Table a technical and political committee promoted in
September 2006 by the Ministry of Labour and made up of: the Ministry of Education,
University & Research, Local Authorities (Regions, autonomous provinces, etc..) and
Social Partners, is aimed at defining and implementing a National Qualifications
System (NQF). This system will integrate, in a common and national framework, all the
different standards existing at all levels. A common frame will be developed in order to
unify all types of title, qualifications and diploma delivered by the Ministry of Education,
Universities, Ministry of Labour, Local Authorities (Regions, autonomous provinces,
etc) together with the classification adopted by the employment services.
Romania Sub system concerned : HE
Referencing methodology not yet approved
Formal link between the cycles (Bachelor, Master and doctorate) to the levels 6, 7 and
8 respectively

Descriptors used and Process

Generic descriptors are included in the draft methodology for HE qualifications
development

71
 The process is on-going. In the future, the quality assurance will perhaps be concerned
with this linking
Spain Sub system concerned : HE
Referencing by blocs
3 levels according to Bologna Process

Descriptors used and Process

Annex I of RD on official university teaching organisation establish for each one of the
three levels (Degree, Master and Ph. D.) the minimal and basic guidelines on general,
specific competences, able to be assessed, with reference and inclusion, in the event,
of those that will be established in the Spanish HE Qualification Framework (MECES,
Marco Espaol de Cualificaciones para la Educacin Superior).
Process : The current stage is an experimental one. An open process of pilot projects
and (re)elaboration of Degrees, Mater Degrees and Ph Degrees is now in course of
realisation.
The process to verify correspondences will depend on the final approval of the Spanish
HE Qualification Framework (MECES)

72
3 Sub-systems of NQF concerned : VET
1 -Ways used or to be used for referencing NQF to the EQF levels for only
2 - Descriptors used and Process to verify that it corresponds to the European generic descriptors
Belgium Sub system concerned : CVET (and Education for adults)
Referencing Qualification by qualification
In regard of the EU generic descriptors
Development of a common methodology for referencing by all concerned providers
Italy Sub system concerned : Higher Technical Education and Training (IFTS: Istruzione
e Formazione Tecnica Superiore)
Methodology used : by blocs
Considering that the qualifications issued at the end of a Higher Technical Education
and Training pathway is immediately below the three levels of HE defined in the
Bologna Process (level 6, 7, 8 EQF) and it is advanced towards an Upper Secondary
School Diploma (level 4 EQF), the level 5 EQF is considered the proper level for this
sub-system
Descriptors do not exist
Specific process: the Higher Technical Education and Training sub-system has been
recently reorganized (Decree: January, 25th 2008 concerning Guide lines for the
reorganization of Higher Technical Education and Training System and for the
constitution of Higher Technical Institutes - published in the Official Journal in April
11th 2008, n. 86) and the impact of the reform will be verified in the next years.
General Process: National Table

Sub system concerned basic VET (including apprenticeship) under the

competence of Local Authorities (Regions, Autonomous Provinces, etc)
Methodology used : by blocs
Criteria will be defined by the National Table.
Level 3 EQF seems to be the natural reference for the level II Qualifications and only
attending the final exam (Esame di Stato) at an Upper Secondary School, a Diploma (di
Istruzione Secondaria di secondo grado) could be achieved
(level 4 EQF).
The reference for the level I Qualification (3-year course) is probably level 2 EQF.
Anyway there is still a tough debate about it.
When the work of the National Table will be completed, each Region will verify the
compatibility of their qualifications systems to the criteria, the descriptors and the
standards defined at national level by the National Table, creating/updating their own
Regional Qualification Systems
Descriptors do not exist
Process : National Table/Committee and specific (Region) processes and social
partners
Sub system concerned : Second-level VET under the competence of Local
Authorities (Regions, Autonomous Provinces, etc)
Referencing Qualification by qualification
based on a common methodology set up by the National Table
Descriptors dont exist
Process : Depends on the specific qualification
Sub system concerned : Adult Education and Continuing Vocational Training
Referencing : By blocs or Qualification by qualification, depends on the concerned
qualification
Descriptors dont exist
Process : Depends on the specific qualification
Romania Sub system concerned : IVET
Referencing methodology not yet approved
Descriptors and process :
There exist LOs included in units of LO. A qualification is described by a number of
units of LO
Spain Sub system concerned : National VET System of Qualifications and Vocational
Education and Training
Referencing by blocs

73
The professional qualifications are arranged in 5 levels and professional families. The
National Catalogue of Professional Qualifications at the moment covers I-III levels and
constitutes the base for the elaboration of the vocational education and training offer
that constitutes the Qualifications. It is as well the reference for the assessment and
accreditation of professional competences acquired through work experience and/ or
non formal learning
Criteria at national level are, among others, knowledge, initiative, autonomy,
responsibility and complexity of the activity to be performed.
EQF descriptors are being considered in terms of correspondence (matching)
between VET-
NQF(National Catalogue of Professional Qualifications) and EQF levels.
In the normative provisions concerning the general organisation of Vocational Training
(IVET) in the General Education System, it is foreseen to specify the European
Referent for every one of the titles
Descriptors are spelled out in the Royal Decree 1128/2003 regulating the National
Catalogue of Professional Qualifications: in the preamble, it is stated that the
professional qualifications are organized in levels following criteria related to the
European Union and to the professional competence required in each of these levels
The process by which a qualification is assigned to a CNCP level follows the
methodological guidelines and stages established for the construction of National
Catalogue of Professional Qualifications (CNCP). The process to verify that it
corresponds to the European generic descriptors has been carried out by groups of
experts from every professional family

74
4 Sub-systems of NQF concerned :Compulsory education
1 -Ways used or to be used for referencing NQF to the EQF levels for only
2 - Descriptors used and Process to verify that it corresponds to the European generic descriptors
Belgium Subsystem concerned : Compulsory education
Not defined
Italy Subsystem concerned
Referencing by blocs
At the moment, there is not a formal reference to the pertinent level EQF of the
qualifications released in this sub system.
However, level 4 EQF seems to be a natural reference for the 5-year-pathway when
obtaining a Diploma, and level 3 EQF for the 3-year-pathway when achieving a I level
VET Qualification
Methodology
Qualifications of this sub system are now described as:
General target of the training process (obiettivi generali del processo formativo -OGPF);
i.e. educational, cultural and professional profile (profilo educativo, culturale e
professionale PECUP);
Specific learning targets (obiettivi specifici di apprendimento - OSA).
Specific Process: Not yet.
General Process: National Table
Romania Subsystem concerned Compulsory education (general)
Not yet defined
Spain Subsystem concerned : General Education (Compulsoy and PostCompulsory)
Concerning General Education in Compulsory and Post-Compulsory General
Education, it remains an open question to be dealt with NEQF decision
Methodology :
Basic education comprises Primary, Compulsory Secondary and Post-Compulsory
Secondary -Bachillerato- stages.
In the case of Bachillerato and its modalities (Arts, Sciences and Technology,
Humanities and Social Sciences), normative provisions establish minimal pedagogic
principles, objectives, contents and assessment criteria according to core subjects,
modality subjects and optional subjects. Objectives and assessment criteria could be
considered generic descriptors.
In general education, normative provisions establish minimal pedagogic principles,
basic competences (close to key competences) and the corresponding assessment
criteria; a diagnostic assessment of basic competences is included on finishing the
second cycle of primary and in the second year of the compulsory secondary stage

75
Summary of analysis on methods for referencing

The analysis finds that in all countries the referencing of HE education to the EQF will be realised
according to equivalence with the three Bologna cycles. For VET, it seems that the referencing will be
based on existing descriptors or on a learning outcomes approach to describe qualifications. If a
referencing by blocs is adopted, a process to verify the robustness of the referencing is intended. The
approach of qualification by qualification appears to be suggested in the case of when the national
system is not formally structured.

For compulsory education, the analysis has revealed that referencing this part of the national systems
to the EQF is generally undefined.

Overall, the existing system of qualifications has a significant bearing on the methods which will be
chosen for referencing to the EQF.

Where a framework exists, the referencing method will take the form of a framework to framework
approach, however this may not be technically straightforward. The methodology will have to provide
a way to refer national frameworks to the EQF using different sets of descriptors and in some cases a
different number of levels to the EQF.

Referencing by blocs has the advantage of allowing a fairly quick referencing to the EQF without
much change to existing systems of levels in the countries. However, basing the referencing purely on
a level to level match does not address the wider goals of transparency and mobility of the EQF. This
is because some existing levels are currently based on other criteria such as duration of training which
are not independent of the process of learning and in contradiction with the learning outcomes
approach.

Therefore referencing by blocs can only been seen at this stage as a transitory step. If however
referencing in this way is accompanied by improved descriptions of qualifications based on learning
outcomes as well as robust and clearly defined quality assurance procedures, there is a greater
chance that the referencing can be accepted as defensible leading to mutual trust.

The notion of a transitory step can also be applied to the qualification by qualification approach
because the existing material is not yet completely expressed in terms of learning outcomes.

Conclusion on methods of referencing

For countries developing their frameworks and referencing these immediately to the EQF, the existing
national system has an important influence on the approach that will be adopted for the referencing.

A transitory step may be necessary to make the shift from a learning inputs based description of
qualifications to a learning outcomes approach before effective referencing can take place.

76
4. OVERALL CONCLUSION
The existing national systems of qualifications, including sub-systems, have an important influence on
the development of a NQF.

The aims of a NQF (and the EQF) are often not shared in the same way for the different sub-systems.
The goals of transparency and mobility are important for VET however are less important for HE or
compulsory general education in the same way; the goal of mobility for HE being more closely aligned
with the objectives of the Bologna process.

Descriptions of qualifications vary too across subsystems. Within VET the links with the labour market
are central to qualification development and permit an easier shift to a learning outcomes approach
than in Higher Education, where the process of learning (and learning duration) remains of high
importance.

The compatibility between Bologna cycles and the upper levels of the EQF may indeed encourage a
process of formal linkage between HE and EQF avoiding the outcomes approach and generic
descriptors of the levels however referencing VET qualifications is based on these concepts is
unavoidable.

As well as being potential obstacles to referencing to the EQF, these differences between sub-
systems could be obstacles to developing an integrative national framework. Developing national
frameworks may lead to changes in the national systems by introducing a new currency of
qualifications, based on the outcomes of learning rather than the inputs of learning. This can in turn
lead to resistance on the part of those involved in qualifications development and delivery.

In light of these difficulties and obstacles it will be necessary to share, at the higher political level, the
aims of transparency and mobility of a national framework. The development of a national coordination
point as suggested in the Recommendation may be an instrument for this.

Dissemination tools for education and training providers to explain the aims, objectives and uses of a
national framework and to help them develop the technical features necessary to develop a framework
will also be of great importance.

In order to avoid resistance, it will also be important to take account of the specificities of each national
system and to proceed gradually, perhaps even going trough a transitory phase and to avoid the risk
of a formal referencing to the EQF without adjusting national systems accordingly and without
overlooking the overall aims of a national framework.

77
78
 Chapter 4 :

Recommendations

79
INTRODUCTION
This chapter addresses the issues raised in the first three chapters and proposes a number of
recommendations on how best to move forward with the implementation of the EQF both at a national
and European level. It is important to note, for the purposes of context, that within this project the EQF
has been considered conceptually rather than in a purely technical context.

Implementation of the EQF has been welcomed in the different countries involved in the project.
However, comparison of approaches to implementation adopted by each country has revealed some
inconsistencies which lead to misunderstanding and lessen opportunities for mutual trust across
borders.

As well as differences in approach to implementation, the project has identified differences in meaning
and definition of the key concepts of the EQF in different countries. Whilst, in general, countries were
signed up to the definitions produced at European level, it was concluded that further clear and
transparent explanations within a national context of terms such as 'qualification' would be required to
ensure the meaning is clearly and widely understood. This would enable 'qualifications' to truly act as
a bridge between the labour market and training providers.

The recommendations proposed in this chapter aim to help ensure a common understanding and
application of EQF related concepts at a national level and therefore promote consistent and
transparent implementation of the EQF across Member States. Changes to national practice have
however not been recommended as part of this report.

What has been recommended are concrete and practical solutions to the issues and problems
identified as part of this project and which are seen as necessary to implement at a local, national and
European level.

The recommendations are firstly summarised below, followed by a more detailed description of each
one:

1 Improving mutual trust through transparency about concepts and indicators for the referencing of
qualifications in each country by the elaboration of a glossary describing the appropriation of the
European concepts of EQF for each country

2 Analysis in depth of the concepts issued from the EQF grid in order to:
- provide common expression of KSC for learning outcomes
- develop a domains metaframework
- disseminate a better understanding of the descriptor competence

3 Exchanges of practices about referencing from NQF to EQF in order to explore the possibility of
using the experiences and expertise gained through participation in Leonardo projects to provide
support and capacity building to future groups.

4 Better use of the existing supports about the content of qualification especially Europass supports
by a better strength between EQF and the other initiatives of the Commission (Europass, ECTS,
ECVET) or other related to describe qualification.

5 Articulation of the 2005/36 directive levels grid with the EQF for the qualifications concerning
regulated professions.

6 Providing a set of documentations adapted to the different kinds of stakeholders

7- Reminder to the Member States that they have to designate NCP officially

80
RECOMMENDATION 1 - TRANSPARENCY OF INFORMATION ON
EQF CONCEPTS AND INDICATORS FOR QUALIFICATION
CLASSIFICATION
The project has highlighted the lack of information available at a national level on some of the key
concepts of EQF such as 'qualification', in particular in relation to the concept of 'learning outcomes'.
Professionals involved in qualification design and development of qualifications are often less familiar
with the 'learning outcomes' approach to qualification design and more familiar with describing
qualifications in terms of learning inputs.

Whilst the concept of 'learning outcomes' is widely signed up to, it also does not appear to have a
shared or universal meaning when broken down into its component parts of knowledge, skills and
competences. Other concepts identified when analysing the processes of qualification development
such as certification, validation and recognition also appear to require further explanation according to
a specific national context in order to be understood in the context of the European definition. The lack
of in-depth information available on qualification processes may explain the different translations found
in the various papers disseminated in Europe about the EQF.

This lack of available information was also found at a national level with regard to the processes of
qualification development and conception within different subsystems of education and training
systems. It was concluded that in order to better understand these different approaches that improved
information on the processes and procedures undertaken to develop standards would be beneficial.
This would enable stakeholders to better understand how learning outcomes are constructed and
linked to qualifications.

The exploration of NQFs, as explained in chapter 3, highlights the use and the currencies of
qualifications in the different national contexts. It has been observed that an implicit hierarchy of
qualifications due to the socio-historical position of the authorities delivering qualifications exists
across all the partners. But the evolution of the quality process in the economic and professional or
sectoral aspects introduces new types of qualifications. Generally, such phenomena is completely
unknown by classical or traditional qualifications systems. By the way it is very important now to open
training and qualifications stakeholders to those new approaches in which learning outcomes and
qualifications are discussed process though purposes and nature of currencies are considered till
now as parallel but may be in the future articulated.

As a result of these findings it is recommended that a specific glossary is provided at the end of the
European Recommendation. This glossary will provide a description of each of the key concepts
according to the specific context of each country. Provision of such supporting information and
documentation would help to ensure mutual trust in EQF implementation across borders.

81
RECOMMENDATION 2 PROVISION OF IN DEPTH ANALYSES OF
EQF CONCEPTS
Though, since 2006, further information has been provided, it is concluded that this is not sufficient to
avoid confusion with regard to implementation of the EQF. This recommendation is being proposed in
order to facilitate:

- more consistent understanding and use of the components of learning outcomes - knowledge skills
and competences
- improved dissemination of information and documentation
- improved mutual recognition of the same objects
- improved articulation between VET and HE

As was indicated in chapter 2, the impact of the EQF Recommendation seems to be really welcomed
by stakeholders at the political level, but rather less so at the technical level. Some important work will
need to be done to reach all stakeholders in order to effectively implement the EQF.

2.1 Towards a shared understanding of the concept of 'learning outcomes'

The project identified that there is a need for further information regarding the component parts of the
learning outcome concept, namely knowledge, skills and competences. The descriptor 'competence'
was particularly difficult to find a shared meaning for across all countries. Whilst some countries used
it as more of a stand alone element of a learning outcome, other countries used the term in more of a
holistic way, incorporating knowledge and skills within competences. Moving towards EQF
implementation however it will be important to develop a shared understanding and a common
approach to these components in order to facilitate mutual trust in the results.

This problem is particularly acute with regard to articulation between VET and HE. In the case of HE it
appears to be much more difficult to describe qualifications using learning outcomes and to link them
to the labour market. What were presented as learning outcomes were often in fact closer to inputs
than outputs. This makes it impossible to create pathways between VET and HE in the same country.
Despite the Bologna process, credible pathways between two HE qualifications are rare except when
relationships have been established between two institutions.

It is therefore recommended that some written examples be provided to help disseminate

methodologies and common principles around learning outcomes and their component parts of KSC in
order to produce comparative information and enable valid exchanges for mobility.

2.2 Improving presentation of information on qualifications

During the project a specific difficulty was identified relating to the presentation of qualifications as
reference points in an NQF. In some countries qualifications design may be organised around the
concept of 'profession' combining learning outcomes with pre-defined activities. For other countries
however qualifications are organised around a hierarchy of levels and economic domains covering a
large range of occupations and the activities are not always pre-defined.. This difference has no real
impact on the quality or the credibility of the qualification process. But it does have a real impact when
considering legibility between systems. By using learning outcomes however there is a better
guarantee that legibility between systems and countries can exist.

However, it is suggested that the broad nature of the learning outcomes described in the EQF are not
sufficient as a means to producing this legibility or understanding of qualifications across borders. It is
therefore recommended that another grid of learning outcomes is produced which permits a
classification of qualifications into domains. Such grids already exist in different countries to provide
guidance or information. A common grid would also be very useful to integrate sectoral qualifications.

82
2.3 - Revising the use of the term competence' as a descriptor in the 8 levels grid

A significant amount of difficulty was encountered in coming to a shared understanding of the

descriptor competence across the project countries. This is both because of direct translation into
national languages as well as differences in meaning of the actual concept.

Taking into consideration the unlikelihood of being able to change the terminology at this stage, it is
recommended that the term competence is clarified with a supplementary statement for example,
'competence (responsibility and autonomy)'.

83
RECOMMENDATION 3 EXCHANGES OF PRACTICES ABOUT
TRANSLATION FROM NQF TO EQF
The implementation of EQF will have an effect on developments at a national level. Even in its
weakest form, this impact is likely to lead to the modification of existing approaches to NQF
development. It has been observed that to establish an NQF, it is necessary to involve stakeholders at
a political level and that significant dialogue was already taking place in all project countries to this
effect. During the two year duration of the project, important changes with regard to development of
NQFs have been observed in all the partners countries.

Despite each partner country providing most of the key information required to understand the
qualifications systems, discussions about how to reference levels of qualifications against the levels of
the EQF revealed great differences in approach and proposed methodology. One of the main
concerns was how best to reference 5 or 12 levels of a national framework or levelling system to 8
EQF levels. Added to this was a concern that existing classifications of qualifications were not based
on the same descriptors as those found in the EQF and therefore there is a question as to how to
reference where for example knowledge only criteria for referencing. A question was also raised as to
how to manage referecning in the context of different approaches to learning outcomes in HE and in
VET.

EQF implementation will have to be respectful of all approaches and policies. In order to ensure a
level of consistency of understanding across countries however a transparent explanation about the
different approaches to referencing and methodologies used to reference will be necessary. It is
therefore recommended that information and experiences from each country is disseminated centrally
(via the European Commission) with the aim of sharing practice and understanding the diversity of
approaches. Suggestions for how to disseminate such information include:

A specific European website to disseminate information

Country specific studies to demonstrate approaches and methodologies used in referencing ( to be
published on the website)
A resource base/ library of documentation where more detailed information on qualifications and
national systems can be made available.
Workshops with stakeholders involved in referencing of NQFs to the EQF for sharing practice

Since it is not impossible or suitable to harmonise the methodologies for referencing at a European
level, it will be necessary to provide tools to National Coordination Points to help develop national
methodologies in order to make the implementation of EQF more effective. At this point in time, it was
observed that it would be possible for the same qualification which is delivered in two different
countries to be referenced against two different levels of the EQF as a consequence of two different
and independent referencing exercises. It is hoped that sharing of practice might help to minimise
such eventualities.

84
RECOMMENDATION 4 BETTER USE OF THE EXISTING
SUPPORTING INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION RELATED TO
THE CONTENT OF QUALIFICATION (E.G. EUROPASS)
Information produced about qualifications has been found to be quite varied across partner countries.
Much supporting documentation was identified and discussed, however very few countries were able
to provide full and complete information about the content of qualifications available to assist with
referencing to the EQF.

The Europass documentation and in partcular Certificate Supplements and the Diploma Supplement
appear to provide helpful information about the content of qualifications. This documentation also has
two important advantages:
They are in the same format for all European countries
The Certificate Supplements and the Diploma Supplement have specific items which permit a
description of qualifications in terms of learning outcomes.

However it was cited that a problem exists woth the Europass supplements in that thet are often not
filled in consistently across different countries. Some countries may not compete all of the fields and
other countries do not use it at all. If however they were filled in comprehensively and consistently
they could provide a common, qualitative basis both for the purposes of referencing and for producing
more detailed information about qualifications.

It is recommended that the Certificate Supplement is reviewed with the purpose of developing
guidance on how to complete it rather than change the format itself. It is also recommended that a field
relating to EQF referencing could be added (see annex 2).

The Diploma Supplement could also be revisited to integrate the KSC approach which the current
format does not address.

85
RECOMMENDATION 5 ARTICULATION OF THE 2005/36
DIRECTIVE LEVELS GRID WITH THE EQF FOR THE
QUALIFICATIONS CONCERNING REGULATED PROFESSIONS
The competent authorities in charge of qualifications pertaining to regulated professions are faced
potentially with having three different types of referencing to undertake: (i) referencing qualifciations
where relevant to the NQF; (ii) referencing NQSs/ NQFs to the EQF; and (iii) referencing to directive
2005/36.

In some countries, qualifications pertaining to regulated professions are not integrated in the NQF, for
others the qualifications for same professions are not regulated in all the countries. In the field of
sports, for example in sailing, the project found this to be a problem. The qualifications considered as
part of the project therefore not comparable between the different countries. Such an exercise, even
when conducted by technicians, will never be official and validated.

The descriptors adopted in directive 2005/36 are very different compared to those adopted in NQFs
and the EQF. This has resulted in a situation whereby many of the authorities in charge of referencing
do not know how to use the different sets of descriptors; whether it is possible to choose one over
another and whether they are required to use each of the separate sets of descriptors for each set of
referencing. Added to this for each different type of referencing, different descriptions of qualifications
are required. This can lead to differences in levelling of qualifications creating public at the level of the
end user.

Further problems exist with regards to differences in approach across the different types of
referencing. When considering the Bologna process, the level referenced relates to the duration of
curriculum. As this duration is not the same according to the countries, and since there is no
transparency as to how the different competences have been weighted it makes it difficult to compare
with other referencing of these qualifications using different types of level descriptors.

It is therefore recommended that there is specific reflection at the European level to clarify how
qualifications relevant to regulated professions can be considered. Is there a supremacy given by one
set of level descriptors over another and what do countries do when the qualifications sit outside of the
NQF?

This recommendation is ultimately related to ensuring that all qualifications in a system are able to be
referenced coherently.

86
RECOMMENDATION 6 PROVIDING A SET OF DOCUMENTATION
TO CATER FOR ALL STAKEHOLDERS
The information available about the EQF is quite difficult to understand outside of some experts
networks. Therefore it would be beneficial to have more explanation about EQF according to different
contexts in order to inform and promote the EQF to individuals, employers and training providers at a
European level.

This information should cover all aspects of the European Recommendation including more detailed
information about the key concepts such as qualification and learning outcomes. Information about the
8 level descriptors is not sufficient; it will be necessary to have detailed descriptions of qualifications
and information about their currency as well as about the content and development of the standards.

If such information exists it is extremely rare and focuses on training in its pedagogical dimension
whilst forgetting about the objective of the learning or training.

It is recommended that different types of documentation be provided to cater for all stakeholders. This
information should be:

simple and adapted to the stakeholders in charge of policies with an European overview.
practical for technicians in charge of the referencing
pragmatic for the employers and individuals.

Annex 1 presents a suggestion for a model of the main information needed for dissemination to
stakeholders in charge of qualifications at a national level (here is presented only the index).

87
RECOMMENDATION 7 - REMINDER TO THE MEMBER STATES TO
OFFICIALLY DESIGNATE NCPS
Over the course of the project, legitimacy of the representatives designated to speak about the NQF
and about the referencing between the NQF and the EQF has been called into question. A similar
question has arisen with regard to the validity of information produced by each partner country.

These questions have an important impact on work related to NQF development, EQF referencing and
ultimately for mutual trust. The problem was particularly significant for the partners whose
responsibility or ownership concerned only one sub-system. Since the project took a global view
across the NQFs in eight countries, it was difficult to really have a complete and definitive report and
come to robust technical decisions without balanced representation from each country.

It was also agreed that without a political decision about the designation of the National Co-ordination
Point in each country it is quite difficult to produce implementation of EQF that will be seen as
legitimate. There were also concerns that the NCP should be carried out at the highest political level
to ensure that responsibility is not left with organisations only responsible for one subsystem for
example.

It is recommended therefore that this issue be debated at European level in order to permit successful
implementation.

88
CONCLUSION
The project concludes that it is necessary to set up of a permanent network for the
implementation of EQF at a European level and at a national level.

The Commission has established an Advisory Group to oversee the implementation of the EQF at a
European level and which should function to provide advice on implementation to NCPs. This group is
a key point of communication between the European Commission and NCPs at a national level and
will meet three times a year.

Implementation of EQF will require time and importantly investment from each country. This
investment is not only financial but also institutional and personal. The EQF objectives will ultimately
require a real cultural revolution where learning outcomes, assessment and certification will become
the focus of qualifications rather than delivery of training.

The EQF hopes to provide a better link between training and employer needs. Qualifications are an
economic and social indicator whose currency depends upon the credibility of the capabilities and
competencies evaluated and assessed. The pedagogic process leading to the development of those
capabilities has to be underpinned by quality assurance so as not to devalue this currency. The EQF
project has demonstrated however very few countries can really demonstrate this level of quality
control which is embedded as a requirement of the EQF.

The EQF is a new instrument, understood by few experts who will have to build capacity and
understanding amongst all stakeholders involved in the process of qualification design and
development and delivery as well as the end users. This will be challenging as very little knowledge
and understanding is currently available to this end. It is therefore vital that exchanges between the
pioneers at the national level take place verify and build a common approach to referencing to the
EQF, following the same principles and sharing different tools and methodologies at the same time as
respecting diversity.

A great hope is given to the establishment to permanent group and peer learning clusters already
organized about EQF implementation and a dissemination of their conclusions will be very useful to
such networks. It is suggested that the main conclusions of the exchanges made through this network
be directly transmitted to the EQF Advisory and permanent groups to inform any developments taking
place.

89
 Recommendations for an efficient implementation
of EQF at a national level

1 Improving mutual trust through transparency about concepts and indicators for
the referencing of qualifications in each country by the elaboration of a glossary
describing the appropriation of the European concepts of EQF for each country

2 Analysis in depth of the concepts issued from the EQF grid in order to:
- provide common expression of KSC for learning outcomes
- develop legibility of the different domains frameworks used to classify
qualifications
- disseminate a better understanding of the descriptor competence

3 Exchanges of practices about referencing from NQF to EQF in order to explore

the possibility of using the experiences and expertise gained through participation in
Leonardo projects to provide support and capacity building to future groups.

4 Better use of the existing supports about the content of qualification especially
Europass supports by a better strength between EQF and the other initiatives of the
Commission (Europass, ECTS, ECVET) or other related to describe qualification.

5 Articulation of the 2005/36 directive levels grid with the EQF for the qualifications
concerning regulated professions.

6 Providing a set of documentations adapted to the different kinds of stakeholders

7- Reminder to the Member States to designate officially NCPs

Set up a permanent network between the NCPs

90
 Annex relating to the chapter 2
Questions:
- Level of knowledge of the EQF in the
- In what ways is the EQF being used within
- How is information and understanding of the EQF being disseminated within ?
- What committees and/or working groups have been set up to take forward the EQF
within ?

1. Higher Education
Level of knowledge of the EQF in Higher Education
Belgium Low
France Presentation of EQF during different meetings organised by Higher education
authorities at a national and regional levels by the CNCP
Italy Within the University Education and Higher Artistic and Musical Education (AFAM Alta
Formazione Artistica e Musicale) knowledge of the EHEA Framework is more
widespread than knowledge of the EQF, which is quite low.
Knowledge of the EQF is high among all national and regional stakeholders involved in
the Higher Technical Education and Training (IFTS Instruzione e Formazione Tecnica
Superiore).
Poland High schools participate in Bologna Process and they have already implemented a
Framework for Qualifications of the European Higher Education Area and ECTS points
(European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System) They also give the Supplement
for Diploma. However the knowledge on European Qualification Framework is very
little.
Romania EQF is known in the subsystem and a methodology was developed to describe the HE
qualifications based on learning outcomes at the EQF levels 6, 7 and 8
Spain QF-EHEA: distinction is made between QF-EHEA and EQF.
Priority is given today to the implementation of NQF-EHEA (MECES), on the ground of
being more realist and responsive to the current needs in HE subsystem than EQF.
Compatibility between both tools is noticed.
Scotland There is a reasonable level of knowledge of the EQF at senior management level within
the HE sector. At national level, Scottish universities work closely with the Framework
for Higher Education Qualifications of Scottish Education Institutions and the SCQF. At
European level HE works with the Framework for qualifications for the European Higher
Education Area for transnational mobility of students and graduates. We expect to use
EQF to help transnational and transectoral mobility.
Wales Universities participate in Bologna Process and they have already implemented a
Framework for Qualifications of the European Higher Education Area and ECTS points
(European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System) They also give the Supplement
for Diploma. However the knowledge on EQF is limited.

In what ways is the EQF being used within Higher Education?

Belgium Formal assimilation of levels 6 to 8 to Bologna process cycles
France With the Bologna process, the levels 6, 7, and 8 of EQF are dedicated to the 3
degrees delivered by the Higher Education authorities. Actually some reflection is
undertaken to propose a content of the degrees in terms of competencies
Italy According to the Bologna process, University qualifications (I and II level degrees and
doctorate) will be linked respectively to the levels 6, 7 and 8 EQF. As at Oct 2008,
Universities are re-thinking academic programmes in terms of learning outcomes
described on the basis of the Dublin Descriptors.
IFTS qualifications are already described in Learning Outcomes and will be linked to
Level 5 EQF.
Poland According to agreements of Bologna Process, higher education in Poland is related to
four highest levels of EQF: level 5 Teacher Training Colleges at Bachelors level;
level 6 qualifications of the first cycle (Bachelor); level 7 qualifications of the
second cycle (Master), level 8 qualifications of the third cycle (PhD).
Romania The EQF levels are taken in consideration when the qualifications are described
Spain New legislation in July 2008 states the Organic Structure of the Ministry of Science and
Innovation and the Ministry of Education, Social Policy and Sport in which new

91
 departments and programs have been stated to carry out the EQF within the national
system. Besides the new HE diplomas should be adapted in terms of competences
Scotland At national level, Scottish universities work closely with the Framework for
Qualifications of Scottish Education Institutions and the SCQF. At European level we
work with the Framework for qualifications for the European Higher Education Area for
transnational mobility of students and graduates. We expect to use EQF to help
transnational and transectoral mobility.
Wales Formal assimilation of levels 6 to 8 to Bologna process cycles

How is information and understanding of the EQF being disseminated within Higher
Education?
Belgium Nothing
France With the Bologna process, the levels 6,7, and 8 of EQF are presented as
automatically dedicated to the 3 degrees delivered by the Higher Education
authorities (in French the degrees are : licence, master and doctorat)
Italy University and AFAM sub-systems, information and understanding of the EQF are
disseminated through Ministerial decrees or laws. Some national meetings are
organized by universities.
IFTS, information and understanding of the EQF is disseminated through meetings
organized among the different stakeholders and operators at both national and local
level.
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National Qualification
System.
Romania The information was disseminated by conferences, seminars and publications
Spain A recent RD of Ministry of Education, Social Policy and Sport states the elaboration and
coordination with Ministry of Science and Innovation of actions and norms for the
adoption and development of NQF-EHEA and NQF (RD 1128/2008 on Basic Organic
Structure of Ministry of Education, Social Policy and Sport).
Scotland Information is being disseminated via the UK Europe Unit and through Universities
Scotland Learning and Teaching Committee.
Wales Nothing at present. First Wales EQF co-ordination point meeting held with good HE
representation.

What committees and/or working groups have been set up to take forward the EQF within
Higher Education?
Belgium Bologna Promoters
France The Bologna experts hold meetings at a national level where the CNCP is
participating and proposes some local meetings in which the CNCP intervenes to
present the EQF makers and a very limited number of social partners.
Italy Bologna promoters have played an important role in Universities and AFAM by
participating at meetings managed at national level and with the Universities as well as
updating the dedicated website (www.processodibologna.it)
A National Table of Standards was established in 2006 to develop a NQF of minimum
occupational, training and certification standards. This Committee is promoted by the
Italian Ministry of Labour and involves the Ministry of Education, University and
Research, Local Authorities (Regions and Autonomous Provinces) and Social Partners.
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National Qualification
System.
Romania The Agency for Qualifications in HE sets up groups to develop qualifications in HE.
They are supposed to cooperate with National Authority for Qualifications (NAQ)
Spain Provisional planning for the definition and implementation of the NQF-EHEA:
- National Committee- Working Group for the implementation of NQF-EHEA
Working Groups by knowledge domains (experimental projects)- Proposals for the
elaboration of NQF- EHEA. (See RD 1183/2008 on Basic Organic Structure of
Ministry of Science and Innovation.)
Scotland None. There is no need for any HE sectoral committees or working groups on the EQF.
We believe that Scotlands engagement with EQF should be undertaken via the SCQF
Partnership and its committees and or working groups, on which universities are
represented. Any HE issues or discussions arising from EQF would fall within the remit
of the Universities Scotland Learning and Teaching Committee.
Wales None. Part of the EQF CQFW national Co-ordination Group

92
 2. VET
Level of knowledge of the EQF in VET
Belgium Middle
France The CNCP is invited to present EQF in the different VET authorities committees at a
national level and at a sectoral level (for inspectors, teachers).
Regular meetings are held in the framework of the CNCPs plenary session.
Italy Knowledge of the EQF is high among national and regional policy makers and
stakeholders.
th
Poland Some conferences related to EQF have been organised, among others: the 29 of
September 2006 The Ministry of Labour and Social Policy organised the conference
National occupational qualification standards the way to build National Qualification
Framework. The Ministry of National Education organised the conference Peer
learning activity on National Qualifications Frameworks 11-13 June. However, at this
moment the knowledge on EQF does not involve anybody apart from a small group of
experts. The dissemination of knowledge on EQF is planned after developing the model
of National Qualification Framework in Operational Programme Human Resources
2007-2013
Romania EQF is well known and the qualifications are developed or revised on levels in
accordance with EQF descriptors
Spain The passing of the Organic Law 5/2002 on Qualifications and VET has given rise to the
creation of the National System of Qualifications and Vocational Training, as
institutional backbone of the System, the National Catalogue of Professional
Qualifications and Associated Modular Catalogue of VET has been established.
Scotland There has been no formal evaluation conducted on the impact the EQF development
has had in the sectors in which SQA operates. SQA is receiving enquiries from the
college sector relating to the EQF, mainly around what level qualifications will placed
against the EQF.
Wales Wider level of understanding with regulators and Federation of Awarding Bodies.

In what ways is the EQF being used in VET

Belgium Aim to develop an integrative NQF based on Los and generic descriptors
France A working group (included VET stakeholders) is now constituted with statistics
institutions in order to have a common methodology for all the French sub-systems
including HE to link NQF to EQF
Italy EQF is not being used within VET (Oct 2008) but the NQF which will be developed by
the National Table of Standards will include all the Italian education, training and
professional sub-systems and will link to the EQF qualifications levels.
Poland Within Operational Programme Human Resources 2007-2013 it was planned to
develop and to implement National Qualification System that would be a part of
National Qualification Framework related to EQF. First activities of analytical and
research types will start in the autumn 2008.
Romania The development and revision of VET qualifications are made in correlation with EQF
levels descriptors.
Common principles for QA in VET are implemented through the National Quality
Assurance Framework
Spain A matching exercise between National Catalogue of Professional Qualifications and
the corresponding EQF levels was carried out during the consultation phase.
Currently, EQF is taken into account as European reference
Scotland
Wales All VET programmes are based on learning outcomes and have level descriptors.

How is information and understanding of the EQF being disseminated within VET
Belgium Dissemination begins with the Vademecum Construire un cadre des certifications en
cfwb
France A working group (included VET stakeholders) is now constituted with statistics
institutions in order to have a common methodology for all the French sub-systems
including HE to link NQF to EQF
Italy Information and understanding of the EQF are disseminated through articles,
institutional websites and national and local meetings.
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National Qualification
System.

93
Romania The information was disseminated by conferences, seminars and publications
Spain Mainly through two channels:- General Council of Vocational Training (Advisory body,
tripartite, on VET matters)- Working Groups in the implementation and development of
the National Catalogue of Professional Qualifications.
Scotland At events and seminars, SQA colleagues are very occasionally asked about European
developments and depending on the type of event it is, SQA will take the opportunity to
briefly mention European developments, not necessarily just the EQF. Within SQA
colleagues receive regular updates on European developments for disseminating as
they see fit
Wales NCP

What committees and/or working groups have been set up to take forward the EQF
Belgium Comit directeur du Consortium de Validation des Comptences
France The stakeholders involved in the working groups have already followed and participated
to the EQF consultation. They are now stakeholders of the national meetings of the
project and organised dissemination for their own institution.
Italy The National Table of Standards
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National Qualification
System.
Romania Sectoral Committees supported by NAQ have been set up and have the responsibility
to design the sectors strategy for labor force development and validation of professional
qualifications for levels 1 to 5 EQF
Spain It exists in General Council of Vocational Training a WG (Europa) dealing with
European dimension, on matters such as ECVET, EQF and related issues.
Scotland SQA Reference and Certification Board alerted to the target date of March 2009 for
completion of referencing of SQA qualifications to the EQF, and to explore how SQA
will reference the EQF levels to meet that target date. SQA will develop a
communication plan around any referencing developments.
Wales CQFW National EQF Co-ordination Group

3. Information, Advice and Guidance

Level of knowledge of the EQF within Information, Advice and Guidance
Belgium
France Information is produced on the CNCP website. This website and the RNCP are one of
the main tools used for guidance.
Italy At the moment it is not possible to understand the level of knowledge of the EQF
among the different actors (public and private) that are involved in IAG activities.
Poland Low level of knowledge, general information about the use of EQF in the future to
recognise non-formal and informal qualifications and to enlarge the vocational mobility
in Europe.
Romania The level of knowledge is still limited but counselling and guidance structured
activities are ongoing focusing on career progress and lifelong learning
Spain It is still soon to estimate the level of knowledge of EQF, more effective perhaps
through EUROPASS agencies.
Scotland
Wales Very limited at present

In what ways is the EQF being used within Information, Advice and Guidance
Belgium
France When the translation from NQF to EQF will be done the information will be indicated in
the RNCP for each qualification described.
Italy N/A
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National Qualification
System.
Romania EQF will facilitate a better understanding of career pathways and recognition of
competencies obtained in different contexts
Spain
Scotland Due to lack of awareness and understanding of the EQF, use of the EQF will not be
used at the moment by Careers Scotland staff.

94
Wales Information on IAG is not being disseminated yet

How is information and understanding of the EQF being disseminated within Information,
Advice and Guidance
Belgium
France The information is essentially produced by the CNCPs website.
Italy N/A
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National Qualification
System.
Romania Information disseminated through conferences and seminars
Spain Through web sites, conferences and projects.
Scotland Information and understanding of the EQF is currently not being disseminated within
Careers Scotland.
Wales Not as yet

What committees and/or working groups have been set up to take forward the EQF within
Information, Advice and Guidance
Belgium
France The CNCP is linked to the different institutions involved in mobility (Euroguidance,
NARIC, eures, 2e2f) in charge of guidance at the European level.
Italy There are no committees or working groups
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National Qualification
System.
Romania Sectoral committees have been set up at the sectors levels
Spain
Scotland Currently within Careers Scotland no committees/working groups have been
established to take forward the EQF. A member of Careers Scotland staff is currently
on an assignment to SCQF to take forward a joint SCQF/Careers Scotland action
plan.
Wales None

4 Ministry of Education
Level of knowledge of the EQF in Ministry of Education
Belgium Low (more interest for IVET)
France The CNCP is invited to present EQF in the Ministry of Education committees at a
national level and at a sectoral level (for inspectors, teachers).
Regular meetings are held in the framework of the CNCPs plenary session.
Italy Among policy makers and the national managers, the level of knowledge of the EQF
is high but among operators (headmasters and teachers) the level of knowledge of
the EQF is very low.
Poland Big knowledge of experts who prepare the activities leading to develop National
Qualification System within Operational Programme - Human Resources 2007-2013
Romania EQF principles and key issues are operational in TVET. In case of academic
qualifications debates are ongoing
Spain In General Education System, non university levels, explicit reference is made to EQF
in the RD on the organisation of middle and higher VET cycles (Technician and
Advanced Technician Degrees).
Scotland
Wales Fair within the qualification division with the Welsh Assembly Government.

In what ways is the EQF being used in Ministry of Education

Belgium Formal proposal of linking levels of diplomas to EQF levels
Italy A working group included the Ministry is now constituted with statistics institution in
order to have a common methodology for all the French sub-systems to link NQF to
EQF
France The EQF is not used with ED sub-system but the NQF which is being developed by
the National Table of Standards will include all the Italian sub-systems and it will link
to the EQF.

95
Poland Operational Programme Human Resources 2007-2013 was developed in which it
was planned to develop and to implement National Qualification System including
National Qualification Framework related to EQF and solutions enabling lifelong
learning and the recognition of formal, non-formal and informal qualifications. First
activities of analytical and research types will start in the autumn 2008.
Romania The qualifications description according to EQF levels descriptors is more advanced
in initial VET
Spain EQF-levels, through the national levels of professional qualifications are foreseen as
European referent for VET titles/ diplomas, as well as for the Vocational Initiation
Programs (PCPI) designed by the Education Administrations at national and regional
level.
Scotland
Wales The NCP for Wales

How is information and understanding of the EQF being disseminated within Ministry of
Education
Belgium N/A
France A working group included the Ministry is now constituted with statistics institution in
order to have a common methodology for all the French sub-systems to link NQF to
EQF. The Ministry has its own web site www.education.gouv.fr or www.e-
education.gouv.fr
Italy Dissemination is through the participation to the National Table of Standards and
other stakeholder meetings organized at national, regional and local level.
Information on EQF is disseminated through articles published in specialized reviews
and through the official website of the Ministry of Education, University and Research
(www.pubblica.istruzione.it) and those of its agencies e.g. (www.indire.it)
Poland Meetings of working groups that plan activities within Operational Programme
Human Resources 2007-2013, organisation and participation in few seminars and
conferences dedicated to EQF.
Romania Information disseminated through conferences, seminars, focus groups, working
groups
Spain As part of the current activities of departments of information, advice and guidance
supporting websites, conferences and projects.
Scotland
Wales On going conferences and seminars to widen understanding

What committees and/or working groups have been set up to take forward the EQF within
Ministry of Education
Belgium administration
France The stakeholders involved in the working groups have already followed and
participated to the EQF consultation. They are now stakeholders of the national
meetings of the project and organised dissemination for their own institution.
Italy The National Table of Standards
Poland Operational Programme Human Resources 2007-2013 was prepared that includes
information on how to develop and to implement National Qualification System
according to EQF.
Romania At the ministry level working groups to define the initial VET qualifications have been
set up. The working groups are coordinated by the National Centre for VET
development.
The National Agency for HE qualification was set up.
Spain There are Ministry departments involved in EQF projects
Scotland
Wales NCP Wales

5. Ministry of Labour
Level of knowledge of the EQF in Ministry of Labour
Belgium
France The CNCP is invited to present EQF in the Ministry of Labour committees at a
national level and at a sectoral level (for inspectors, teachers).

96
 Regular meetings are held in the framework of the CNCPs plenary session.
Italy Among policy makers, national stakeholders, the Ministry of Labours agencies (e.g.
ISFOL), the level of knowledge of EQF is high.
Poland The Ministry does not participate directly in activities related to EQF.
Romania The Ministry of Labour cooperates with the Ministry of Education in implementing
NQF being responsible for CVT. Both Ministry of Education and Ministry of Labour are
supporting NAQ institutional building.
Spain Both In the RD on Training for Employment and on Certificates of Professional
Standards, a similar reference to EQF
Scotland
Wales N/A

In what ways is the EQF being used in Ministry of Labour

Belgium
France A working group included the Ministry is now constituted with statistics institution in
order to have a common methodology for all the French sub-systems to link NQF to
EQF
Italy The Ministry has promoted the setting up of the National Table of Standards, to
develop the NQF (which will include all the Italian subsystems). This will be linked to
the EQF levels and descriptors.
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National Qualification
System.
Romania The qualifications description for different sectors for levels 1-5 EQF are made based
on EQF levels descriptors
Spain Via National Catalogue of Professional Qualifications, EQF is quoted in the context of
transparency and mobility.
Scotland
Wales N/A

How is information and understanding of the EQF being disseminated within Ministry of Labour
Belgium
France A working group included the Ministry is now constituted with statistics institution in
order to have a common methodology for all the French sub-systems to link NQF
to EQF
Italy Through meetings organized at national and local level. Through articles published in
specialized reviews and on the website of the Ministry of Labour (www.lavoro.gov.it)
and those of its agencies (www.isfol.it and www.europass-italia.it, and
www.nrpitalia.it )
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National Qualification
System.
Romania Information disseminated through conferences and seminars
Spain
Scotland
Wales N/A

What committees and/or working groups have been set up to take forward the EQF within
Ministry of Labour
Belgium
France
The stakeholders involved in the working groups have already followed and
participated to the EQF consultation. They are now stakeholders of the national
meetings of the project and organised dissemination for their own institution.

Italy The National Table of Standards.

Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National Qualification
System.
Romania Sectoral committees have been set up at the sectors levels. The sectoral committees
are coordinated by the National Authority for Qualifications
Spain
Scotland
Wales

97
6.Employers
Level of knowledge of the EQF within Employers
Belgium
France The CNCP is invited to present EQF in the representatives of employers
committees at a national level and at a sectoral level (for inspectors, teachers).
Regular meetings are held in the framework of the CNCPs plenary session.
Italy Among national and local enterprises representatives (e.g. Confindustria) the
knowledge of the EQF is high. However, among employers the level of knowledge
is low.
Poland General knowledge of few experts how to use EQF at the European labour market.
Romania NAQ is supporting the sectoral committees development which are tripartite bodies
involving employers organisations, trade unions and government.
Employers organisations have different levels of knowledge related to EQF. The
level of understanding depends on their policy for HR development and interest for
cooperation in the sector.
Spain Through participation in advisory bodies as General Council of Vocational Training
and Working Groups.
Scotland Ranges from nil to limited; a small proportion of employer representative groups
stated that they had begun to familiarise themselves with and work with the EQF
Wales Very little

In what ways is the EQF being used within Employers

Belgium
France A working group included representative of employers is now constituted with
statistics institution in order to have a common methodology for all the French sub-
systems to link NQF to EQF
Italy Employers are not using the EQF but their representatives are involved in working
groups of the National Table of Standards promoted by the Ministry of Labour in
order to have a common methodology for all the Italian sub-systems and to link the
future NQF to the EQF.
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National
Qualification System.
Romania EQF was used in designing career pathways and recognition of learning in
different contexts.
Spain Specially activities in the CVT domain.
Scotland The EQF has been used mainly with regard to migrant workers. The land-based
sector was identified as one area of industry which has used the EQF in this
context

Wales NCP

How is information and understanding of the EQF being disseminated within Employers
Belgium
France A working group included representative of employers is now constituted with
statistics institution in order to have a common methodology for all the French sub-
systems to link NQF to EQF
Italy The national representatives have participated in a consultation on the EQF. Now
(Oct 2008) they are involved in national and regional meetings in order to
disseminate information on the EQF.
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National
Qualification System.
Romania Information disseminated through conferences, focus groups, seminars, thematic
debates
Spain Through transnational projects at sector level.
Scotland Broadly speaking, dissemination of the EQF amongst employer representative
groups is not at an advanced stage. Some employer representative groups have
raised the issue of the EQF at employer forums
Wales NCP

98
What committees and/or working groups have been set up to take forward the EQF within
Employers
Belgium
France The stakeholders involved in the working groups have already followed and
participated to the EQF consultation. They are now stakeholders of the national
meetings of the project and organised dissemination for their own institution.
Italy Occupational Sectors working groups made up of enterprises representatives are
involved in the National Table of Standards.
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National
Qualification System.
Romania Representatives of the employers associations are members of the sectoral
committees.
Spain
Scotland Some strategic planning with regard to use of the EQF is scheduled to take place
in the near future through the Alliance of Sector Skills Councils
Wales NCP

7 Social Partners
Level of knowledge of the EQF within social partners
Belgium
France The CNCP is invited to present EQF in the representatives of social partners
committees at a national level and at a sectoral level (for inspectors,
teachers).Regular meetings are held in the framework of the CNCPs plenary
session.
Italy Among the national employees representatives (e.g. CGIL, CISL, UIL) knowledge
of the EQF is high. However at local level knowledge is low.
Poland General knowledge of few experts
Romania At the level of sectoral committees supported by NAQ, formed by employers
associations and trade unions representatives the knowledge is more advanced
comparing to single partners.
Spain Through participation in advisory bodies as General Council of Vocational Training
and Working Groups.
Scotland A- Trade Unions: Very little knowledge of EQF amongst the Trade Unions in
Scotland at present
B - Community learning and Development: Specific knowledge of the EQF is low
Wales Very little

In what ways is the EQF being used within social partners

Belgium
France A working group is included representative of social partners now constituted with
statistics institution in order to have a common methodology for all the French sub-
systems to link NQF to EQF.
Italy Social partners do not use the EQF but they are involved in occupational sectors
working groups organized by the National Table of Standards.
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National
Qualification System.
Romania The development of new qualifications at the sectors level is made in accordance
with EQF.
Spain Specially activities in the CVT domain.
Scotland A- Trade Unions: No evidence to suggest it is being used at present
B - Community learning and Development: Usage of EQF is rare
Wales NCP

How is information and understanding of the EQF being disseminated within social partners
Belgium
France A working group is included representative of social partners now constituted with
statistics institution in order to have a common methodology for all the French sub-
systems to link NQF to EQF.
Italy Social partners have participated in the EQF consultation. Representatives are

99
 involved in national and local meetings organized by the Ministry of Labour to
disseminate information on the EQF.
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National
Qualification System.
Romania Information disseminated through conferences and seminars.
Spain Through transnational projects at sector level.
Scotland A- Trade Unions: No evidence to suggest it is being used at present
B - Community learning and Development:
At the moment a major strand of work is to address the recognition and valuing of
achievement in CLD, with the SCQF as a core component of that. In our view,
given that the SCQF should map to the EQF, the route to better understanding of
the EQF lies through better understanding and use of the SCQF
Wales NCP

What committees and/or working groups have been set up to take forward the EQF within
social partners
Belgium
France The stakeholders involved in the working groups have already followed and
participated to the EQF consultation. They are now stakeholders of the national
meetings of the project and organised dissemination for their own institution.
Italy Occupational Sectors Working Groups comprising representatives/experts of the
Social Partners have been established for the works of the National Table of
Standards.
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National
Qualification System.
Romania Working groups inside sectoral committees were created to design new
qualifications or to revise the existing ones.
Spain
Scotland A- Trade Unions: None at present
B - Community learning and Development:
No groups that we are aware of have been set up to specifically look at use of
EQF in CLD. In line with the comments at 3, our main grouping focuses on use of
the SCQF in CLD (we convene an SCQF CLD Forum).
Wales NCP

8- Institution or organisation in charge of NQF

Level of knowledge of the EQF within Institution or organisation in charge of NQF
Belgium
France The CNCP is the representative of France in the advisory group for the
implementation of EQF. It is responsible of the meetings to inform all the
stakeholders at the national level.
Italy At the moment no institution/organisation is in charge of the NQF. The only
organization that deals with the NQF and the EQF is the National Table of
Standards, promoted by the Ministry of Labour. This Committee involves all
stakeholders at national, regional and local level, such as the Ministry of
Education, University and Research, Local Authorities (Regions and Autonomous
Provinces) and Social Partners. The approach adopted is based on the
maintenance of a relationship of co-operation and sharing between the different
key actors involved in the development of the NQF.
Poland Big knowledge of experts who plan activities on behalf of the Ministry of National
Education.
Romania The National Authority for Qualifications is creating a National Framework of
Qualifications.
The National Agency for Qualifications in HE is responsible for HE qualifications
within the NQF context.
Spain Concerning the NQF-EHEA as indicated in HE subsystem. There will be a General
Sub-Direction to cope with European Space items.- Concerning National System
of Qualifications and VET, INCUAL, National Institute of Qualifications is the
technical agency responsible for defining, preparing and maintaining up to date the

100
 National Catalogue of Professional Qualifications and Associated Modular Training
Catalogue.
Scotland The Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework Partnership is a company
limited by guarantee responsible for the quality and integrity of the SCQF;
developing and promoting the SCQF and maintaining and developing relationships
with other Frameworks. Partners in the SCQF Partnership are: the Association of
Scotlands Colleges, Universities Scotland, the Quality Assurance Agency for
Higher Education, Scottish Ministers and the Scottish Qualifications Authority.
Knowledge of the EQF within the SCQF Partnership and its members is high
Wales CQFW

In what ways is the EQF being used within Institution or organisation in charge of NQF
Belgium
France The CNCP uses its plenary sessions and the working group set up for this
Leonardo da Vinci project to provide information and reflection about EQF.
It is in charge of the management of the working group mentioned above, as the
coordinator of the project.
Italy
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National
Qualification System.
Romania The EQF is used to design the NQF
Spain
Scotland
Wales NCP

How is information and understanding of the EQF being disseminated within Institution or
organisation in charge of NQF
Belgium
France France uses specific grids since forty years with 5 levels. The understanding of
EQF supposes a great change about positioning qualifications in another type of
hierarchy. The CNCP uses its plenary sessions and the working group set up for
this Leonardo da Vinci project to provide information and reflection about EQF.
It is in charge of the management of the working group mentioned above, as the
coordinator of the project.
Italy
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National
Qualification System.
Romania Information disseminated through conferences, seminars, thematic debates
Spain INCUAL web site: www.mec.es/educa/incual
- EQF projects - Publications
Scotland Information is disseminated through conferences, seminars and on the SCQF
Website at www.scqf.org.uk
Wales NCP

What committees and/or working groups have been set up to take forward the EQF within
Institution or organisation in charge of NQF
Belgium
France The stakeholders involved in the working groups have already followed and
participated to the EQF consultation. They are now stakeholders of the national
meetings of the project and organised dissemination for their own institution.
Italy
Poland Activities will be undertaken just after developing the model of National
Qualification System.
Romania
Spain A NQF encompassing the eight levels of EQF will be considered once the
proposals for the NQF-EHEA will be adopted.
Scotland Under the auspices of the SCQF Quality Committee an SCQF to EQF Working
Group has been established.
The SCQF Partnership is also a member of the UK National Co-ordination Group
Wales NCP

101
Establishment of NCP

Belgium No NCP

France CNCP is NCP but is not officially designated as such.

Italy No obstacles. ISFOL designated as the NCP.

No NCP and no information on how this will be established

Poland

Romania National Authority for qualifications nominated as NCP

Will require legislation.

Spain No NCP and not clear how this will be established

Scotland SCQF Partnership designated as the Scottish NCP*

DCELLS designated as the NCP in Wales*

Wales

* SCQF Partnership and DCELLs are part of the UK Co-ordinating Group along with QCA and CCEA
for England and Northern Ireland

102
 Annex relating to the chapter 3
* Typology of NQFs

Type Description Example

Implicit framework
Multiple frameworks Levels for one or more sectors/sub-systems Hungary
(no links between sector (general, vocational education and training (today)
frameworks) (VET), higher education (HE), adult
education and training), some with
descriptors.
Coordinating A single set of levels covering all Turkey
frameworks sectors/sub-systems (no descriptors) but (proposal)
(no intention to integrate each sector/sub-system has its own sub-
sectors) range of levels.
Meta-framework A set of levels and descriptors covering all EQF
(No intention to integrate sectors/sub-systems which is the basis for
pathways) relating to each sectoral framework.
Integrating framework A set of levels and descriptors covering all Austria (in the
(Intention to bring sectors/sub-systems, each sector/sub- future)
pathways together) system uses this set of levels and Lithuania
descriptors. Scotland

103
 Annexes relating to the chapter 4
ANNEXE 1: BELGIAN PROPOSAL :

This proposal was developed specially to gather information about the Belgian situation where
the integrative approach of NQF is not defined as well for the different training sectors involved
as the regional dimension.

Index

1. What is EQF
1.1. Main goal
1.2. Main principles
1.3. A tool among others

2. What EQF is not

3. Why a French speaking framework?

3.1. Transparency and mobility, challenge in Cfwb
3.2. National framework, a regulation tool in a qualification market context

4. Methodological issues

5. Where we are in Cfwb?

6. Why a intermediate referencing

7. Forth steps

8. How to appropriate the generic descriptors

9. Taking decision

10. Perspectives

104
 ANNEX 2: CERTIFICATE SUPPLEMENT

Certificate supplement (*)

Europass
(1)
1. Title of the certificate

(1)
in the original language

2. Translated title of the certificate (1)

(1)
If necessary. This translation has no legal status. .

3. EQF level
Domains

4. Profile of skills and competences

Comment : description of learning outcomes in KSC

5. Range of occupations accessible to the holder of the certificate

(*)
Explanatory note: This document is designed to provide additional information about the specified certificate and does not
have any legal status in itself. The format of the description is based on the following texts: Council Resolution 93/C 49/01 of 3
December 1992 on the transparency of qualifications, Council Resolution 96/C 224/04 of 15 July 1996 on the transparency of
vocational training certificates, and Recommendation 2001/613/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 July
2001 on mobility within the Community for students, persons undergoing training, volunteers, teachers and trainers. More
information on transparency is available at: www.cedefop.eu.int/transparency European Communities 2002

105
6. OFFICIAL BASIS OF THE CERTIFICATE
Name and status of the body awarding the Name and status of the national/regional
certificate authority providing accreditation/recognition of
the certificate

Level of the certificate (national or international) Grading scale / Pass requirements

Access to next level of education/training International agreements

Legal basis

7. OFFICIALLY RECOGNISED WAYS OF ACQUIRING THE CERTIFICATE

- Statutory Apprenticeship System and the Advanced Certificate
- Entry requirements
- ECTS or ECVET organisation
- Additional information

106
ANNEX 3: ARTICULATION WITH THE DIRECTIVE 2005/36
As the preamble to the Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April
2008 on the establishment of the EQF for lifelong learning considers both, the development and
recognition of citizens knowledge, skills and competence, the cooperation in the university sector and
in the area of vocational education and training, the Bologna and the Copenhagen processes as well
as the Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on
the recognition of professional qualifications.

All the above considerations appear, in a way or another, in the Recommendation on the
establishment of the EQF, except for the de Directive 2005/36/EC that should be taken into account as
well.

Spain presents the relationship between the 5 levels set in the European Directive and the 5 levels of
the Spanish National Catalogue of Professional Qualifications (CNCP) by comparison of the
descriptors from both of them. CNCP levels perfectly fit descriptors provided for by the Directive.

Since the five levels of the Spanish CNCP are equivalent to the five levels of the European Directive,
this approach is used to compare with the eight levels set in the Recommendation on the EQF. We
suggest that a similar grid of comparison could be used as part of the recommendations related to the
establishment of the EQF.

The following table shows an overall relation between levels, the resulting qualifications set by the
Ministries of Education Social Policy and Sport, Labour and Immigration and Science and Innovation
as well as the legislation that governs everything. It also presents a scenario for a possible integrated
Spanish NQF

This scenario contemplates the relationship with EQF for VET (Diplomas and Certificate of
Professional Standards) and Higher Education at university. The possible level of General Certificate
of Secondary Education and Baccalaureate it is proposed having as a reference the development of
basic competencies in these stages.

107
 Responsible Certification/accreditation
G. D. of G. D. for INCUAL Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of
Employment Education and Education Labour and Science and
Social Affairs Culture Social Policy Immigration Innovation
Civil
and Equal (European and Sport
Opportunities Commission) Spain Servants
of the Spain Spain Spain Spain
European
Commission
European European National Education Certifications University
Directive on the Qualifications Catalogue of System in Vocational Degrees Civil
recognition of. Framework Professional Diplomas Education Service
Professional Levels Qualifications and Training Basic
Qualifications (CNCP) for Statute
Levels Employment
8 Phs Degree**
Masters A1
5 7 5
degree**
Bachelors
4 6 4
degree**
A2
Higher Certificate of
Technical Professional
Diploma in: Standards.
Levels and Qualifications

3 5 3* * VET or Level 3 B
* Arts and
Design or
* Sports
Technical Certificate of
Diploma in: Professional
* VET or Standards.
2 4? 2*
* Arts and Level 2 C1
Design or
* Sports
3? Baccalaureate
Certificate of
Vocational
Professional
1 2? 1* Initiation
Standards.
Programs
Level 1
C2
General
Certificate of
1?
Secondary
Education
Directive Recommendation Organic Act Organic Act Law 56/2003, Organic Act
36/2005 on of the European 5/2002, of 19 2/2006, of Mai of 16-12- 4/2007, of 12-04-
the Parliament and of June 2002, 2006, on 2003, on 2007, on Law
recognition of. the Council on on Education Employment Universities Royal 7/2007,
Legal basis

Professional the establishment Qualifications Royal Decree Decree of 12

Qualifications of the E. Q. F. for and VET 34/2008, of 1393/2007, of 29- April
lifelong learning 18-1-2008, 10-2007, article 8 2007,
on the on the General Civil
regulation of Structure of Service
the University Basic
Certificates of Education
Statute
Professional
Standards.
National Catalogue of Repertory of Recording of
/Repertory
Catalogue

Catalogue of VET Diplomas Certificates university

Professional of degrees
Qualifications Professional
Standards.

* Qualifications of level 1, 2 and 3 are defined by CNCP and applied to the training offer.
** Qualifications are defined by universities and verified by the ANECA (National Agency of Evaluation and
Accreditation).

108
We would like to thank all our national partners
which took time to contribute to this report.
France:
Promotor : AFDET : www.afdet.org
Coordinator : CNCP: www.cncp.gouv.fr
National partners:
- Representatives of ministries in charge of social affairs, agriculture, industry, trade and craft
industry, labour, education, higher education, youth and sports, health,
- Representatives of employees unions: CFDT, CGT, UNSA
- Representatives of employers unions : MEDEF and CGPME
- Representatives of chambers of commerce and of chambers of mtiers
- CEREQ

Italy :
Coordinator : ISFOL : www.isfol.it
National partners:
- Ministry of Labour
- Region Piemonte
- Region Toscana

Romania
Coordinator: National Centre for Technical and Vocational Education Development: www.tvet.ro
National partners:
- National Authority for Qualifications / National Adult Training Board
- Ministry of Education, Research and Youth
- Ministry of Labour, Family and Equal Opportunities
- National Agency for Qualifications in Higher Education and Partnership with Economic and
Social Environment
- Sector Committees

Scotland:
Coordinator: Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework Partnership: www.scqf.org.uk
National Partners: the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework Partnership would like to
acknowledge and offer its sincere thanks to all of the organisations in Scotland which took the time to
contribute to this report.

Spain:
Coordinator: INCUAL: http://www.mepsyd.es/educa/incual/ice_incual.html as the technical body of the
General Council of Vocational Training with representatives of the autonomous regions, the central
state administration, trade unions and employers' associations.
National partners:
- Ministry of Education, Social Affairs and Sport
- Ministry of Labour and Immigration

Wales
Coordinator:
Credit and Qualifications Framework for Wales - Welsh Assembly Government: www.cqfw.net
National partners:
Higher Education Funding Council for Wales (HEFCW)
Credit Common Accord Forum

109
110
111
 Partnership

Promotor: Association Franaise pour le

Dveloppement de lEnseignement Technique
(AFDET) France

Coordinator: Commission Nationale de la

Certification Professionnelle (CNCP) France

Partners:

Conseil de lEducation et de la Formation

(CEF) Belgium (French speaking part)

Istituto per lo Sviluppo della Formazione

Professionale dei Lavoratori (ISFOL) Italy

Instytut Technologii Eksploatacji - Pastwowy

Instytut Badawczy (ITEE) - Poland

Centrul Naional de Dezvoltare a

nvmntului Profesional i Tehnic
(NCDVET) Romania

Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework

(SCQF) Partnership Scotland

Instituto Nacional de las Cualificaciones

(INCUAL ) Spain

Credit & Qualifications Framework for Wales

(CQFW) - Wales

Observer: Qualifications and Curriculum

Authority (QCA) UK

112