A Critical Reflection on Qualifications Frameworks and Possible Future Directions

1. A Critical Reflection on Qualifications Frameworks and Possible Future Directions 2008 Biennale on Education in Africa Association for the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA) Maputo, Mozambique, 5-9 May 2008

2. Key message 1 “Hanging focuses the mind”

3. Key message 2 Qualification frameworks are growing globally!

4. GREENLAND ALASKA (USA) SWEDEN ICELAND RUSSIA FINLAND NORWAY CANADA ESTONIA LATVIA DENMARK LITHUANIA BELARUS REPULIC OFIRELAND UNITEDKINGDOM NETHERLANDS GERMANY POLAND BELGIUM CZECHREPUBLIC UKRAINE KAZAKHSTAN SLOVAKIA AUSTRIA MONGOLIA HUNGARY SWITZ. FRANCE ROMANIA ITALY UZBEKISTAN BULGARIA GEORGIA KYRGYZSTAN SPAIN NORTHKOREA PORTUGAL UNITED STATES of AMERICA GREECE TURKEY TURKMENISTAN TAHKISTAN CHINA SOUTHKOREA JAPAN SYRIA AFGHANISTAN IRAN IRAQ TUNISIA MOROCCO PAKISTAN ALGERIA NEPAL LIBYA EGYPT WESTERN SAHARA SAUDIARABIA MEXICO TAIWAN UAE INDIA OMAN VIETNAM MYANMAR CUBA MAURITANIA LAOS MALI NIGER CHAD THAILAND SUDAN YEMEN GUATEMALA HONDURAS SENEGAL PHILIPPINES NICARAGUA CAMBODIA BURKINA GUINEA NIGERIA COSTA RICA ETHIOPIA VENEZUELA GHANA PANAMA SRILANKA COTED’IVOIRE CENTRALAFRICAN REPUBLIC LIBERIA GUYANA CAMEROON FRENCHGUIANA MALAYSIA COLOMBIA SURINAME SOMALIA UGANDA KENYA CONGO GABON ECUADOR DEMOCRATICREPUBLIC OFCONGO TANZANIA PAPUANEW GUINEA INDONESIA BRAZIL PERU ANGOLA ZAMBIA BOLIVIA MOZAMBIQUE MADAGASCAR ZIMBABWE NAMIBIA BOTSWANA PARAGUAY AUSTRALIA REPUBLICOF SOUTHAFRICA URUGUAY CHILE ARGENTINA NEWZEALAND

5. Key message 3 There are different types of qualifications frameworks!

6. What is a qualifications framework? A Qualifications Framework sets boundaries A qualifications framework is a set of principles and guidelines which provide a vision, a philosophical base and an organisational structure for construction of a qualifications system National Qualifications Framework Higher Education A qualifications framework is a national/regional resource, representing a national/ regional effort at integrating education and training into a unified structure ABET Schooling TVET Etc. 2008 Biennale on Education in Africa Association for the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA) Maputo, Mozambique, 5-9 May 2008

7. Different qualifications frameworks 2008 Biennale on Education in Africa Association for the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA) Maputo, Mozambique, 5-9 May 2008

8. Towards a common understanding of qualifications frameworks Purpose Explicit reasons for development as reflected in the objectives Philosophy Underlying thinking that influences the framework Prescriptiveness Stringency of criteria for inclusion Scope Measure of integration of levels, sectors and types Architecture Configuration of structural arrangements that make up the framework Incrementalism Rate and manner of implementation Policy breadth Direct and explicit links with other measures Governance Activities that guide, steer and control 2008 Biennale on Education in Africa Association for the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA) Maputo, Mozambique, 5-9 May 2008

9. Purpose (objectives) of qualifications frameworks • Addressing social justice • Improving access • International benchmarking • Communication • Regulation • Articulation Back

10. Underlying philosophy Influencing qualifications frameworks • Global emphasis on the importance of lifelong learning • Globalization, the need to facilitate labour movement and the commodification of education and training • Neo-liberalism • Manageralism • Performativism Back

11. Key message 4 The idea underlying Qualifications frameworks is that of integration (– however defined)

12. What is an Integrated Framework? • Definition: includes different types of learning but also changes the relationships between them. • How should it change the relationships? • Uniformity = Fits all learning and all qualifications into single mould. E.g. stringent common design rules for the structure of qualifications, for the way in their content is specified for assessment, and certification, etc. • Diversity = that recognises and celebrates a wide range of purposes, epistemologies, modes and contexts of learning, but which also recognises the need to build these into a coherent and coordinated system. In order to do this it should impose some aspects of uniformity. • The trick is to decide which is tight and which is loose.

13. What do we want to integrate? • What forms of learning or knowledge do we want to integrate? • In SA linking of education and training (discipline-based and work-based) • One view sees education and training as distinct knowledge structures, modes of learning, and distinct social relations. • Opposing view point: education and training are points on a continuum of learning – they are different but the differences are of a degree and they can shade into another. • Third view sees education and training as primarily social constructs which reflects institutional, political or status divisions with the system

14. Pressure for Integration • Economic: Response to economic challenges of globalisation • Democratic: Response to history of apartheid and redress • Systemic: Response to increase scale and complexity of education and training systems, to the wider range of economic and social purposes they are expected to serve and systemic problems like credentialism and academic drift.

15. Purposes of Integration • Curricular: • to encourage learners to combine different types of learning • to develop integrated forms of learning and knowledge • to promote transferable and generic skills • to promote parity of esteem • Longitudinal: • To make pathways more flexible • To facilitate portability and transfer • To promote seamless opportunities for access and progression in life- long learning • To promote recognition of informal and non-formal learning • Organisational: • To promote more coherent and better coordinated arrangements for delivery, staffing, quality assurance, governance and funding of learning.

16. Key messages 5 There will be resistance to implementing QFs Resistance may include epistemological, political, institutional, conceptual and philosophical

17. Barriers to Integration • Epistemological: • Are real and important • Different fields of knowledge, academic vs occupational. • Behavioural theories of outcomes versus social constructivist theories of outcomes • Political: • Revolutionary change versus evolutionary change • Nature of qualifications e.g. academic qualifications as positional good while raising the status of vocational qualifications. • Institutional: • Arise due to the unintended consequences of the way institutions work • Operation of the social structures such as the labour market.

18. Overcoming Barriers • Clarify the meaning of an integrated framework. • Clarify the objectives of integration. • Make sure that the objectives are achievable. • Clarify the barriers to integration. • Make the framework as loose as possible with its objectives, but manage this tightly. • Progress in stages (incrementally). • Coordinate with other policies.

19. Key messages 6 Learn from others, you don’t have repeat the same mistakes that others have made for example: • comprehensive frameworks • rapid incrementalism • size counts • expensive models • appropriate use of experts and stakeholders

20. Quote “At the heart of current debates on national qualifications frameworks lies a paradox. On the one hand, many countries, including South Africa, introduce such frameworks in order to transform aspects of their education and training system, their society, or their economy. On the other hand, the literature on qualifications frameworks suggests that they are most successful when they are modest in ambition and incremental in approach: when they build upon existing structures and practices and on the trust, the mutual understandings and the power relationships that are embedded within them. In other words, it would seem, the frameworks that are judged to be most successful are those which succeed in transforming very little.” (David Raffe, University of Edinburgh, June 2005)

21. Changes to SA NQF • Move from tight to loose. • Unified to tracked model. • Move from Integration as a ‘social construct’ to ‘continuum of learning’.

22. Scope of the South African NQF • Unified: all systems are integrated • Linked: separate systems but with common structures for transferability • Tracked: separate systems with limited transferability Tracked Unified Linked Back

23. Level 10 Higher Education Qualifications Framework Occupational Qualifications Framework Levels and Frameworks Level Descriptors General & Further Education & Training Framework Level 1

24. Key message 7 QFs are popular because they can be used as instruments of communication, build flexible pathways, benchmarking, accountability, etc

25. Key message 8 Current Wisdom suggests that: • know why you want to use it, • design it in a loose manner, manage it tightly, • start where you are, move slowly using experts and stakeholders appropriately, • build trust and mutual understanding and take existing power relations into account that are embedded, • ensure that you provide accountability and authority, and proper resourcing.

26. Key messages 9 NQF = No Quick Fix Jay Naidoo (COSATU, 1996)

27. A Critical Reflection on Qualifications Frameworks and Possible Future Directions 2008 Biennale on Education in Africa Association for the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA) Maputo, Mozambique, 5-9 May 2008