1 Lifelong Learning Context

1.1 Pace and effects of change The extent and pace of change that has been witnessed over the past twenty years has been much more dramatic and far-reaching than anybody could have imagined. Change is introducing new work and life cultures throughout the developed world. The shifts in the nature and structure of skills, work patterns, companies, and goods and services are bewildering. New and different demands are being made on workers and employers. Static function-based skills and traditional management models and techni ues are becoming inade uate and inflexible in workplaces re uiring the very opposite. The goal is for the development of a new industrial and enterprise culture characterised by flexibility, trust, commitment and the ability to anticipate and harness change. The rapidity of change is being driven by the revolution in information and communication technologies which are resulting not only in dramatic and ongoing reductions in the methods, costs and timescale of storing, processing and transmitting information but also in the physical si!e of the e uipment re uired and the cost thereof. These developments are having the effects of reorganising the labour market and reshaping society in new and fundamental ways. The world in effect is becoming a virtual global village. "lobalisation now makes complex networking and communications possible on a worldwide and real-time scale. #orkplaces can be relocated globally according, demands change and the nature of competition and emerging new knowledge re uires such action. The mobility of labour is also assuming global dimensions as human capital becomes the new currency in the dichotomy between developed and undeveloped economies and as the imperatives of the marketplace take hold. 1.2 The learning response #ith the transformation of economies away from standardised manual production towards more diversified and knowledge-based delivery of goods and services, has come a clamour for increased levels of education and ualifications. The volume, diversity and rapidity of emerging new knowledge re uires a concomitant effect on the capacity of people to respond and assimilate the veritable communications revolution which is ongoing. The methods, forms and location of learning are also undergoing change. $n particular the shift of emphasis from teaching to learning represents a new paradigm in which people are increasingly re uired to take much more responsibility for their own development. %ormal learning in institutions is rapidly being supplemented and&or replaced by learning at work, in the home, in the community and in recreation. The tools for this purpose are also developing apace and becoming increasingly available to ordinary people. 'n example of

this is the advent of the #orld #ide #eb which is giving new meaning to open and distance learning, and vastly increased accessibility to knowledge on a worldwide scale. (ducation of the masses on a basis of diversity never previously experienced is fast becoming a reality. $n this regard, the capacity to learn rapidly has become the new imperative, while the massification of education re uires that the full gamut of ways of learning be exploited to the maximum for the benefit of all. ' number of paradigms can be identified which have shaped education and training policy at national and at (uropean )nion level. The human resource paradigm is reflected in the importance afforded to human capital and the development of employability as a condition for economic growth. ' number of education and training policy initiatives are based on a perception of educational disadvantage epitomised by the lack of skills to successfully compete for employment and lifelong learning as the means of enhancing employability. Such a perspective has helped shape the development of programmes, certification policies and criteria relating to ualifications. #hile the human resource paradigm has served the needs of the ma*ority of learners to date very well, there is increasing recognition that a significant but growing minority exists, for whom such policies have failed to reach or serve. 'lternatively, the social cohesion&human potential paradigm recognises disadvantage as multi-dimensional and characterised by a number of conditions. (ducational disadvantage is *ust one of several factors which lead to social exclusion. Such a perspective and its influence on approaches to countering educational disadvantage is evident in the )N(SC+ report ,earning- the Treasure #ithin. $t identifies the four pillars of education- learning to know. learning to do. learning to live together. and learning to be. This holistic approach to education, aims to minimise the potential threats to society resulting from social exclusion as well as maximising the benefits for the individual. The development of a national ualifications framework provides an opportunity to ensure a proper balance of influence on policy and programmes, between the human resource and the human potential paradigm. The development of a new framework can promote recognition of the value of both perspectives in meeting the diverse needs of the increasingly heterogeneous learning society. 1.3 Future strategy $t is not yet clear whether the traditional learning institutions are responding appropriately to these changes or whether they can succeed in doing so in the future. #e are fast becoming a learning society and the speed and diversity that is demanded will re uire direction and focus if we are to have available the comprehensive spectrum and balance of human resources necessary to cope

with ongoing change. The thrust of this paper is that the coherent development of ualifications and a referential framework in that regard is an appropriate strategy to lead the directive approach re uired and to provide a necessary focus for future progress and development. %urthermore, the context provided by the learning society should inform the nature, development and implementation of an appropriate national ualifications framework. The development of a national ualifications framework provides a new and significant opportunity to address many of these issues. (stablishing such a framework can also serve the important function of promoting and leading the diversity re uired for the learning society. $t can provide a basis for identifying gaps in the current certification arrangements and highlight barriers or obstacles in the pathways for learners within the framework. The process of developing the framework will give effect to a very proactive role for all stakeholders in ensuring the optimum structures and initiatives to meet the needs of the learners and the labour market. $t also provides a mechanism whereby new developments in response to societal or employment changes, can be more easily accommodated within flexible and dedicated structures. #ith such a coherent framework within which to recognise and reference new initiatives, key ob*ectives relating to lifelong learning can be also assimilated and realised. 1.4 Practical issues ' key uestion is /how can the lifelong learning context be used in a practical sense to bring about the desired response in an era of change/. Charles 0andy provided the basis of an answer when he said- /#hat is the difference between training and education1 $f you are well educated, you are easy to train/. The following represent examples of some of the practical issues to be addressed towards finding a more comprehensive answer Clear recognition that the better educated the population, the better the people and the country as a whole will prosper 2articular focus is re uired on the fundamental problems of those who are /socially excluded/, i.e. those without basic skills, literacy and numeracy, who need to be brought up to a basic standard as a minimum ,inks between schools, vocational, adult and higher education and training re uire better sign-posting Curricula re uire change and new approaches to their development to make such links more apparent and more accessible (nabling skills are re uired to create lifelong learning and a full realisation of the learning society. No longer can the skills and knowledge of those leaving education be expected to e uip them for more than a few years unless they also have ac uired the capacity and motivation to continue learning wherever they may be located

 3ualifications systems have to be reshaped to enable learning to be taken in chunks. $ndividualised learning and records of competence are re uired throughout life to enable people to repeatedly enter and exit the formal ualification structure as re uired 4ecognition that using technology in the home, the workplace and the learning environment is no longer an optional extra, but an essential core skill ,earning has to become far more flexible. $rrespective of mode, there should be parity of esteem and, particularly for adults, moving in and out of various modes of learning should be feasible and seamless 'cceptance of the need to build on the constructivist skills of teachers is imperative 'n extensive retraining programme for teachers is re uired to produce independent learners, together with standards for the assessment of such independence The learning grid for professionals needs to extend from kindergarten through to adult education 4eal commitment and input of resources is re uired for both curriculum and staff development 'ppropriate technological infrastructure will be necessary to ensure that remote communities are not left behind 'n independent research agenda with the capacity to inform and to contribute to the shaping of the future will be a key measure to support the realisation of the learning society $n summary, as 2rofessor Nigel 2aine, C(+, Scottish Council of (ducational Technology, points out in his keynote address to Networking 567 'ustralia Conference, that 8what is at issue is significant change in the economic make up of the country, backed by opportunities beyond conception and belief, fuelled by the intelligence and know-how of a population operating on a global scale, exporting its knowhow. 1.5 Challenges and proble s Not all of the above will happen with existing curriculum and ualifications structures. That realisation is part of the fundamental importance of introducing a basis for developing a national ualifications framework at this time. 0owever, other initiatives will also be re uired to raise the profile of the personal, social and vocational competencies of the population. $n particular, goals and targets will be re uired such as the developments under the "oals 9,::: 'ct in the )nited States. $n addition, the establishment of a national database, for recording the details of all initiatives and individual competencies, represents a particular challenge.

To date, there has been little recognition of the fact that many of the most successful access programmes start in the community, where learning is taken to the participants. +nce people feel comfortable, they can move out of that community to *oin another community - perhaps a formal learning or occupational community. Skills shortages should have no place in the learning society, yet despite increasing resources and participation in formal education these lacunae have not been filled. 'n example of the critical effect of this problem is recalled from ;667, when at one point the <ank of (ngland is uoted as saying- /the skills shortage is one of the factors which influenced last week5s interest rate rise/. 2roviders need to be facilitated and encouraged towards developing new and better programmes involving new modes of delivery. (xperience has demonstrated that the development of modularised certification systems is not in itself a sufficient condition to ensure the development of modular provision. $n practice even though ualifications are designed to take account of modular certification, provision is still often designed on the basis of an academic year, with so many class periods per week for the entire year, as a series of modules delivered in parallel. =oving from that model of provision to actually modularising the programme in a meaningful way has significant implications for providers - in terms of staffing, resourcing and programme planning. (xamples such as these re uire a proactive approach to creating the conditions for the development of more flexible modes of programme provision. Such outcomes cannot be realised by regressive approaches involving authoritarian power-play, domination or threats. 'll of the participants in the system need to realise the importance of developing new modes of delivery for the future development of the learning society. This is of paramount importance to promote the wider participation of learners for whom the traditional model will not be appropriate. Standards are re uired to support models of learning without increasing bureaucracy. This will also depend on the fundamental input of providers and represents a particular challenge in that it will re uire a co-ordinated approach at national level, involving leadership and staff training. $t is important to stress that problems such as these will continue to arise as long as- the solution re uires more resources than people are prepared to invest - motivation and delivery systems are unable to respond with the necessary flexibility for rapid course development as needs arise

- mindsets are closed to the need for obvious action in relation to institutional barriers, access barriers and practice barriers. 'll of the above are big issues that challenge our ingrained assumptions of what learning is, and change our mental model accordingly. That view derives from 2eter Senge5s well-known book, The %ifth >iscipline, concerning the learning organisation, where he defines a mental model as /a deeply ingrained assumption of how we understand the world and how we take action/. 1.! "i#ersity of action re$uired ,ike other countries $reland has experienced diverse expansion of the provision of education and training programmes within public and private institutions, workplaces and the community. ' number of areas such as adult education and continuing professional development have witnessed particular growth and development. #hile the provision of education and training in $reland attempts to address identified diverse needs, progression and articulation possibilities are often limited. $n many cases the manner in which certification has developed, based on the particular provision arrangements, has reinforced these difficulties. "enerally, difficulties have been experienced most acutely by those who engaged in modes of learning which, until recently, might have been regarded as marginal to the education and training system, but are now increasingly recognised as an essential element of a learning society. 2ublicly-funded institutions are seeking ways to better address the context of lifelong learning through the formal learning process. 'ny initiative which has the effect of placing unnecessary restrictions on them will not prove helpful. #hat is re uired is that they be given a reasonable and meaningful basis to develop and carry out their true mission - a mission that is most appropriate to the future learning society. 2rivate institutions also are seeking to develop their role in the marketplace and they should not be restricted in doing so any more than publicly-funded institutions. There should be scope for healthy competition between public and private institutions as is the case internationally, provided the needs of learners are fully respected and given the priority they deserve. $ndividuals involved in work, community and autonomous learning processes are seeking new forms and methods of accreditation of such informal learning. There may well be opportunities for this sector to engage with both public and private institutions in rationalising how the needs of people are to be met in a lifelong learning context.

%ormal education institutions cannot remain isolated from the legitimate demands of the informal sector nor dictate the boundaries of development of the private sector. Neither can the private and informal sector remain oblivious to the validity of practice and experience of the formal institutions in terms of accreditation and certification. ' balance is needed if lifelong learning issues are to be realistically addressed.

2 %ational &ualifications Fra e'or() Characteristics and Principles

2.1 "efinition ' National 3ualifications %ramework is a mechanism through which all relevant learning achievements may be referenced to one or more of a generic set of coherently-related ualifications for the purpose of national accreditation and&or recognition. $n the case of $reland, the ualifications framework should become the single, nationally and internationally accepted entity, which relates uniformly to awards in respect of further and higher education and training. $t should be designed to link strategically with the certification arrangements of the seven existing universities and the state examination system for second level schools. 2.2 Co on characteristics of a national $ualifications fra e'or(

Comparative international research on different national systems, particularly the )?, the Netherlands, the )nited States, New @ealand and 'ustralia, reveals that a number of common characteristics of a national ualifications framework can be identified. "enerally, a national ualifications framework has its uality assured by a national authority. $t is subscribed to by all partners and recognised by all users of the framework. $n many cases, new ualifications frameworks build on existing arrangements, aiming to work towards greater coherence and flexibility. ' key ob*ective of any ualifications framework is that all awards have a purpose and a relationship to one another which learners, the public and all other stakeholders can readily understand. 2.3 *d#antages of a national fra e'or( The development of a national framework contributes to the achievement of a transparent system of ualifications. Such a framework can provide a flexible basis for the accreditation and recognition of ualifications with more progression choices, due to the increased clarity of the relationships between different types

of awards. +f particular importance to lifelong learning is the facility to provide a basis for recognising achievement relating to both formal and informal learning contexts, and to both further and higher education and training. ' number of advantages would accrue to the users of the framework, most significantly, greater transparency for those seeking access to ualifications. $t can also provide employers with a basis for evaluating ualifications and enable providers to include arrangements for access and progression when designing programmes. 'n important outcome arising from development of the framework is the potential for increased participation by learners and access for a wider variety of target groups through more clearly defined pathways. ' national ualifications framework is an important vehicle for uality improvement in ensuring that the nature of what learners achieve, in relevance and balance, is appropriate to modern needs. $t can also facilitate the development of more and higher uality learning programmes that contribute to lifelong learning. ' national ualifications framework not only provides an important mechanism for dealing with issues of national recognition but also transnational recognition, on a formal basis, between relevant national authorities. This represents a significant advance on current practice whereby individual organisations negotiate with another corresponding organisation on a bi-lateral basis for mutual recognition of particular awards. $n many cases, individuals seeking recognition of their ualifications abroad need to avail of credential verification agencies, rather than the /one-stop-shop/ expertise that results from a single national ualifications framework. 2.4 Principles to underpin the design of a national $ualifications fra e'or( The nature of the ualifications framework re uired should be determined and underpinned by a variety of the most basic but essential principles. $n discussing principles, in this regard, it is appropriate to specify that it is principles&primary elements, which confer particular ualities or properties on the framework, that are in uestion. <earing this in mind, the following are offered as appropriate underpinning principles of the framework Coherence Aconsistent, meaningfulBB 4elevance Aappropriate to key interestsB $nclusivity Aopen, welcoming to allB 4eferentiality Arelativity, seriation, directivenessB %lexibility Acapable of adaptation and different emphasesB Transparency Aclarity, comprehensibilityB

Coherence is ensured through the use of a generic set of related ualifications as the basis of the framework. The selected classification of ualifications must

have both national and international significance, and be based on sound principles and supported by clear definitions. Relevance re uires that the generic ualifications forming the main scaffolding of the framework be related to the needs of learners and industry, and to the social, cultural and educational needs of local, regional, national and international communities. Inclusivity provides for the referencing, accreditation and&or recognition of all relevant achievements within the framework, thereby characterising such achievements with a sense of participation and parity of esteem. 'n inclusive framework assimilates the accreditation and recognition of inherent differences in achievement relating to the range of human abilities and intelligences. Referentiality utilises properties such as distinctiveness, relatedness, e uivalence and comparability of ualifications as evidenced by clear, relevant and differentiated standards. Flexibility is a property which renders the framework capable of adaptation to different contexts and changing needs and of reflecting different emphases. 'ccreditation processes will re uire adaptation to take account of the different contexts in which learners learn and the different types of providers of education and training programmes seeking accreditation. Transparency ensures that the framework is clearly presented and disseminated in such a variety of ways as to be easily understood by and accessible to all. Transparency is a principle that underpins the design of the framework and also informs its operation. $n the operation of the framework, transparency relates to the achievement of a condition where all principles, processes and procedures are made explicit in order to ensure that they are easily understood by users of the system.

3 "e#eloping the %ational &ualifications Fra e'or(

3.1 +ey tas(s The realisation of a National 3ualifications %ramework will re uire a number of tasks to be undertaken in order to establish the template for the framework and to organise its development, implementation and maintenance. (xamples from the range of tasks are outlined below. 3.2 +ey preli inary tas(s

,ack of progress to date towards the establishment of a template for the development of the national ualifications framework creates a void which will have to be filled at the outset of a suitable transition period. Tasks involved in establishing the framework include inter alia determining

the general template for developing the framework, including the principles, parameters and other criteria to be used in developing the framework within the transition period guidelines for awards, including the general definition and nomenclature for generic ualifications the location and referencing of existing ualifications, one to another, within the framework principles for defining, setting, and developing standards the specification of uality indicators for awards and the promotion of uality

To enable effective implementation of a new framework of ualifications, certain transition arrangements will need to be put in place, which protect the currency of existing awards while the framework is being developed. 2rovision will need to be made to recognise existing awards within the framework, translating awards using nationally agreed parameters for the framework where necessary, and converting&adapting some awards so as to enable them to meet recognition criteria. This also has implications for the establishment of new structures and the phasing out of existing ones. Careful consideration will need to be given to the establishment of the National 3ualifications 'uthority and the amount of lead time which it may re uire, ahead of the establishment of other bodies, to initiate the beginning of the transition phase and the development of the framework according to the template for that purpose. ' key uestion arising isShould these preliminary but key tasks be prioritised before or at the outset of the transition period so that the 'uthority has a better opportunity to institute certain developments that take precedence over or coincide with setting the groundwork for the establishment of new awarding bodies1 3.3 +ey de#elop ent tas(s (xamples of the tasks involved in developing the framework include inter alia progress in relation to the uality management standards which define compliance with the framework.

 identifying domains and&or sectors within which the framework can be developed, with key relevance to the institutional involvement of industry, and pathways established in broad occupational areas the design of a national credit system, for awarding credits in respect of learning achievement, with a set of specifications for describing and comparing achievements relative to the national ualifications framework determining the standards of ualifications within the framework on a sectoral basis translating existing awards within the framework and determining, within a transition period, their nomenclature and how they should be related and accredited establishing articulation arrangements, enabling progression and transfer between different classifications, levels and pathways of the framework developing the credit system in support of the ualifications framework establishing processes by which any award can be evaluated against the indicators of uality - irrespective of where it is developed or delivered. $n the transition phase, particularly careful attention will have to be directed at whether the new awarding bodies can be established immediately to participate in a range of tasks such as those above. $t will be essential in the interests of learners who are presently undergoing programmes of education and training to continue to protect the currency of existing awards. Simultaneously, the national ualifications framework will be in the process of development involving the redefinition and restructuring of existing awards within the new system. Some key uestions arise in this contextCan existing awarding bodies and certification arrangements be phased out while new awarding bodies are being established to herald a new regime and to introduce new methods and new accreditation arrangements1 #ill it be possible to phase out existing bodies&arrangements immediately and give to the new bodies the dual task of continuing existing awards while also developing the new system1 $n either event, the management of these tasks and related functions poses a complex implementation uestion which has implications for initial staffing, resourcing and funding of all the bodies concerned, both new and existing. >evelopment of the national ualifications framework will be a challenging and complex process which will re uire the involvement of all bodies and stakeholders in actively contributing to the various aspects of the work to be done. ' preliminary view of the nature of the tasks can be gleaned from a consideration of the principles to be invoked in that regard.

3.4 +ey principles to infor fra e'or(

the process of de#eloping the

' national frame of reference is a key mechanism for recognising awards and establishing comparability between them. The centrality of uality and the development of uality assurance and improvement processes should be evident in relation to all aspects of the framework. The operation of the framework will re uire the support of all users and this has clear implications for its development and maintenance. These perspectives provide a valuable basis from which to identify some key principles which will inform the approach to development of the framework and be central to its operation. They include the following-

3uality Subsidiarity 2artnership 'uthority 'ccess 2rogression Transfer =obility

Quality is the level of satisfaction with the effectiveness of awarding bodies and providers of education and training, their products and services, established through conformity with standards and the achievement of excellence demanded and contributed to by learners and other stakeholders. Subsidiarity concerns the decentralisation of decision-making and functions to the particular levels at which they can be dealt with most effectively. The achievement of subsidiarity involves the open delegation of particular functions to awarding bodies, and to providers of education and training in accordance with the principle of uality. Conditions which enable the effective operation of subsidiarity include delegation, nationally agreed uality standards, mutual trust, partnership, uality assurance and improvement processes, and authority. Partnership is a sharing of responsibility with all others, in this case the stakeholders in the system. 2artnership is necessary to ensure uality through the achievement of internal and external re uirements and the effective interaction and collaboration between the various interests. True partnership re uires the most effective use of the principles of subsidiarity and authority. Structures that facilitate partnership are re uired at every level of the national ualifications framework including arrangements between awarding bodies, providers, social partners and other stakeholders. $n this regard, partnership

arrangements also provide an institutional role for business, industry and community organisations, and the support of the social partners in particular. Authority is the ability to ensure compliance by virtue of some power, right, expertise and influence. %rameworks do not invent themselves, nor are they selfsustaining. The range of partners, multiplicity of end-users, and diversity of stakeholders will re uire clear leadership and the authority to ensure compliance with the framework and the uality management standards relating to its operation. The principle of authority in the context of a national ualifications framework is balanced by the effective operation of subsidiarity and partnership. >elegated authority is the formal passing of authority from one body that has the legal basis to do so to another body, sub*ect to certain conditions or standards having being met. Such formal delegation is usually time-limited and sub*ect to review, and is very much part of uality assurance and related directly to the effective operation of subsidiarity. $t should not be activated as a separate process as to do so undermines effective operation of uality assurance and improvement in general Access takes the form of a proactive policy to ensure that all learners, including in particular those who are most excluded and&or disadvantaged, have the opportunity to have their skills, knowledge and competencies fully accredited and certificated. The policy should operate effectively whether it is individual learners who apply for recognition, accreditation or certification, or providers of education and training who seek validation of their programmes in order to gain national certification for their learners. 2roviding access for learners involves establishing the criteria which confer eligibility to apply for progression opportunities. Progression has to be understood from a number of different perspectives $n the first instance, progression towards any award or ualification is dependent on the standards re uired for the particular award being met by the learner. Secondly, if the holder of an award or ualification wishes to undertake a further award, it should be possible for the individual concerned to do so without having to repeat any or all of the achievements previously demonstrated in respect of the original award, i.e. the individual should be enabled to progress towards meeting only the additional standards re uired for the new award. The new award sought need not be at a more advanced level than the award already held. it could be a different award at the same level. Thirdly, in the design of modular courses of learning, progression should be built-in to the greatest possible extent in terms of modules being both crossdisciplinary and vertically structured according to the standard hierarchy and specifications of the national ualifications framework. This is necessary in the interests of flexibility and the optimisation of the principle of progression. %inally, progression should not only be dependent on achievements arising from formal education and training. $nformal learning in the workplace, the

community and elsewhere should also be accredited. $n this way, the accreditation or recognition of prior learning A'2,&42,B should be developed as a means of giving credit towards progression. Transfer is related to the pathways to ualifications. The national ualifications framework should be developed so that pathways to ualifications are as transparent as possible with the maximum number of links between them. This makes it possible for learners to transfer from one ualification route to another with maximum flexibility and credit in respect of their achievements to date. Transfer is often referred to as credit transfer. ' typical example might be a student following the path of a degree course in physics who wishes to transfer out of physics into an engineering degree. $n such a case, that student would in all probability have to study ab initio certain aspects of engineering not encountered in the physics discipline. 0owever, the likelihood is that some physics and physics-oriented material on the engineering course could be accredited and exempted as having already been achieved. Credit transfer in that case means that the student receives credit for those elements of the engineering course which have been achieved to date in the physics course. 'nother example concerns a student in vocational education, e.g. an apprentice electrician, who wishes to transfer into a higher education course for electrical technicians. $n this case, the apprentice should reasonably expect to be given credit for all practical laboratory work in the technician course, in lieu of the practical skills and experience ac uired as an electrical apprentice. 0owever, the apprentice might have to study most other elements of the technician course ab initio. ' national ualifications framework supported by a credit system can facilitate the process of developing credit transfer arrangements systematically and also assist in establishing a comprehensive credit scheme. Mobility concerns the ease of movement of people either within the national territory or internationally, in terms of domicile or the labour market, or both. The relevance of mobility to awards is the recognition that may be afforded to people5s ualifications for access to education or entry to the labour market, as they move within a particular *urisdiction or across national boundaries. $n the context of the national ualifications framework, mobility for learners should mean that holders of awards and ualifications can gain ready recognition enabling them to enter relevant employment and&or further&higher education and training opportunities at home or abroad. $n summary, the distinctions between access, progression and transfer can be summarised in the following way access seeks to confer eligibility to apply for entry to learning opportunities and to the accreditation processes leading to relevant awards

 progression seeks to allow maximum credit for relevant achievements in respect of any award already held or for prior learning experience gained in order to obtain advancement Ae.g. exemptionsB relative to the re uirements of a further award being sought transfer seeks to allow maximum credit for relevant achievements in order to begin learning towards a different ob*ective and&or on a different pathway and&or in a changed location, either within the national territory or outside mobility seeks to ensure recognition and thereby enable learners to enter relevant employment and&or further&higher education and training opportunities at home or abroad. 3.5 ,tandards of learning or achie#e ent The term standard has a variety of meanings and interpretations, and is used in a very wide range of circumstances for different purposes. 'mong the definitions of standard taken from the Concise +xford >ictionary are the following a measure to which others conform or by which the accuracy of others is *udged a degree of excellence re uired for a particular purpose a model for imitation the average uality re uired for a particular purpose a grade of classification in primary schools Standards of learning may relate to any one or combinations of the above. Clearly, standards concern measures, *udgements, re uirements, models, uality, grades, etc. 3.! -a(ing sense of standards #hen discussing standards it is necessary to differentiate between and be clear on the nature of the standards in uestion . The following examples may assist in clarifying this aspect further an institution providing education and training should be operated according to uality management standards a course or programme of learning should be identified in terms of a classification standard and be based on the content standards re uired for the achievement of a particular award or ualification those undergoing assessment for an award or ualification must demonstrate a degree of mastery of the content standards of learning re uired and be able to do so in terms of defined performance standards in the particular area of learning a ualification being considered for the purposes of recognition in a particular situation is re uired to meet certain comparability standards

' number of examples of the use of standards can be gleaned from international research. (ducation in the )nited States differentiates between academic standards, skill standards and occupational standards. #ithin the tri-partite national ualifications framework of the )?, ualifications are classified according to the source of the standards or learning outcomes as follows

the re uirements of an occupation Avocational ualificationsB the traditions of an academic discipline Ageneral ualificationsB the combination of these which is relevant to a given vocational area or field of study Ageneral vocational ualificationsB

$n 'ustralia, three types of standard are endorsed under the National Training %ramework

industry standards, e.g. for Tourism and 0ospitality cross-industry standards, which are common to a range of industries

enterprise standards, developed and used specifically at enterprise level 'll standards are concerned with both uantity and uality. "eneric analysis of any standard will show that it is composed of a number of elements which are also standards in their own right. Skill standards, industry standards, academic standards, etc., are all interrelated and intrinsically part of learning, irrespective of how or where the learning occurs. 'ccordingly, it is suggested that the most appropriate generic term to use in this regard is one that avoids traditional distinctions and stereotyping. Competency is such a term. 3.. &ualifications and a'ards The concept of competency standards can provide an appropriate means of specifying the re uirements for awards and ualifications of the national ualifications framework. <efore considering the matter of competency standards it is appropriate to define the terms qualification and award. 'n award may be described asthe evidence of learning achievement conferred, granted, given or issued to an individual whose achievements have been accredited or recognised as a result of appropriate demonstrations of competency. ' relevant definition of qualification isan award, which indicates that the holder possesses a defined set of competencies recognised and referenced in the national ualifications framework, as a key achievement relevant to the needs of the learning society,

the community and the workplace. The holder of a ualification possesses the credentials to seek entry to a specific occupation, a category of occupations or a broad area of work. $t is considered that two types of award should be made available

a particular type of ualification, and a certificate of credit Arelative to a particular ualificationB

The availability of certificates of credit would have a number of positive benefits, including

the facility of gaining a ualification by means of credit accumulation recording credits and&or awarding a particular certificate in respect of discrete achievements of credit towards a specific ualification clear certification of attainment of any awardAsB other than a specific ualification a precise certificated basis for implementing credit transfer building blocks for the development of a credit system 3./ Co petency standards

's discussed in $ssues 2aper 9 - Quality Assurance and Improvement for a ational Qualifications Framewor!, a generic analysis of competency standards provides a comprehensive and flexible basis for considering standards. Such an approach allows for the inclusion of all existing systems of awards within a template for development. The application of this generic analysis of standards to the awards of the framework illustrates the potential for coherence, flexibility and inclusivity. Classification Standard identifies the general and specific location of learning, within the spectrum of lifelong learning, as the determinants of the overall standard of learning Aor achievementB in a particular case. The general location relates to the relevant domain or occupational sector of learning, e.g. electrical engineering or childcare. The specific location determines the particular standard, stage or level of learning within the general location, e.g. first year apprenticeship or final year primary degree. $t should be noted that the classification standard may represent a credit or a ualification. The following are some examples of classification standards, indicating general and specific locations in each case and also identifying the standard as a credit or a ualification as appropriate

primary education, third class standard AcreditB

electrical engineering, second year craft apprenticeship AcreditB childcare, level 9 vocational certificate A ualificationB biological technician, national diploma A ualificationB 'rts , first year primary degree AcreditB

Context Standards indicate the specialist elements or context standards comprising the particular classification standard. Some of the context standards of a language course, for example, would be reading, writing, listening and comprehension. Similarly, the context standards of a degree course in uality assurance might include uality management, statistical control, instrumentation and control, reliability engineering, etc. Content Standards are statements of the different competencies expressed as outcomes, usually in the form of /what the learner is re uired to know and be able to do/. (ach context standard will comprise a comprehensive range of content standards. Performance Standards are clear specifications of how the learner is re uired to demonstrate that the content standards have been mastered as a result of ade uate immersion in and experience of the areaAsB of learning concerned. 2erformance standards have implications also for the time spent in learning, the depth of experience, adaptability and the speed and flexibility of response. The issue of /how good is good enough1/ also arises in terms of performance standards and allowance is re uired for assessment to be made of the various degrees of excellence that should apply. Ciewing competency standards in this way has a number of advantages in terms of

allowing classification standards and the range of context standards to be determined nationally co-ordinating and focusing the attention of awarding bodies and providers of education and training in relation to setting content and performance standards with the possibility of tailoring them to meet regional or local needs facilitating the professional involvement of business and industry in the determination of relevant standards for the needs of the workplace enabling the providers of education and training to formally interact with and complement the views of the workplace in setting detailed standards and developing course or programme curricula. 3.0 &uality assurance and i pro#e ent

3uality assurance and improvement form part of a uality management system and includes all of the planned and systematic actions necessary to provide

confidence that any one of the following will satisfy given re uirements AstandardsB for the achievement of uality and&or excellenceo o o o

a provider of education and training a course&programme, learner achievement an award

'ccreditation is a term used to cover a range of different types of evaluation for specific purposes, which can be identified separately as follows Registration - the process of formally accrediting Agiving credit toB a provider of education and training to be registered as being of sufficient uality in all respects to provide a course, or a programme of courses, of education and training related to awardAsB of the national ualifications framework. 4egistration may also include responsibility for issuing some or all of the awardAsB in uestion, i.e. delegated authority to issue awards. alidation - the process by which it is formally acknowledged that a given course or programme of learning has been ualitatively designed to meet the standards for a particular award of the national ualifications framework including provision for the achievement of excellence in respect of those standards. Assessment - the processAesB used to determine an individual learner5s achievement when measured against performance standards Certification - the process whereby the formal decision is made that an individual has achieved the necessary standards for a particular award or ualification Recognition is the process whereby a particular achievement or award is- endorsed in the national ualifications framework as having fulfilled the necessary uality assurance and improvement re uirements for that achievement or award, by complying with the specifications of the national ualifications framework or - compared to a similar award of the national ualifications framework as being of e uivalent uality and standard, indicating the credit to be attached to it. 'pproaches to accreditation vary in terms of how they may be biased towards registration of providers or the validation of courses and programmes. 0owever, it is never appropriate to include one at the total expense of the other. 4egistration and validation are occasionally implemented as unified rather than discrete processes. Similarly assessment, certification and awarding function may be implemented in an integrated format. 3.11 ,che a for referencing existing a'ards in the fra e'or(

The appropriate schema for referencing awards in terms of a national ualifications framework should begin from the point of inclusion of all existing awards within broad contexts in which awards are made. These contexts are well known and accepted at present, and can be summarised as

further education and training awards associate higher education and training awards degree higher education and training awards

The schema can be represented diagrammatically as follows-

%)4T0(4 (>)C'T$+N 'N> T4'$N$N" '#'4>S

0$"0(4 (>)C'T$+N 'N> T4'$N$N" 'SS+C$'T( '#'4>S

0$"0(4 (>)C'T$+N 'N> T4'$N$N" >("4(( '#'4>S

Such a schema has a number of distinct advantages as a starting point for development as the status uo position, it should not be controversial different classifications of awards are clear a further education award is not a higher education award a higher education associate award is not a higher education degree award

Taking this scenario as the logical starting point, allows for development and growth of philosophy and practice within a specified transition period, based on increased dissemination of information and knowledge of the totality of awards and their interrelationships. $t is against such a background that change should occur. 'ccordingly, the preliminary referential basis of the framework would appear as shown hereunder0$"0(4 %)4T0(4 (>)C'T$+N 'N> (>)C'T$+N 'N> T4'$N$N" T4'$N$N" '#'4>S 'SS+C$'T( '#'4>S 0$"0(4 (>)C'T$+N 'N> T4'$N$N" >("4(( '#'4>S

NCC' 'wards National Certificates 2rimary degrees C(4T&NTC< 'wards T('"'SC 'wards National >iplomas 0igher >egrees 'dult (d 'wards Community (d +ther 2ost-grad

'wards 'pprenticeship 'wards Traineeship 'wards +ther %DS 'wards =arine&<$= 'wards

'wards

'n important issue to be emphasised is that the three classifications of award are intrinsically different, and although a further education award cannot be a higher education award, it can be given credit towards the achievement of a higher education award. $n such circumstances, the credit would also confer eligibility to transfer from further to higher education. Similarly, an associate award can be given credit towards the award of a degree. 'dditionally, a further education award is not necessarily lower in level than an associate award and there are some circumstances in which an associate award would not be at a lower level than a primary degree. Taking these matters into account provides a much more open basis for the design of the framework and allows increased possibilities for progression and mobility.

4 2 ple enting the %ational &ualifications Fra e'or(

4.1 2ntroduction $mplementation would begin at an appropriate stage in the developmental process and progressively advance towards completion, so as to coincide with the end of the transition phase. $mplementation involves developing and phasing in the system of national awards into the new framework under new uality assurance and improvement arrangements. 't the same time existing awards and awarding arrangements would be phased out. ?ey implementation tasks should be identified in this regard. (xamples of such key tasks are outlined in the next section below. 4.2 +ey tas(s in the i ple entation of the national $ualifications fra e'or( The tasks concerned will have to be implemented in conformity with the terms of future legislation in all cases. The following are among the key tasks to be undertaken in implementing the new framework-

 publication of a general programme of work by the National 3ualifications 'uthority in terms of carrying out its functions in order to achieve the ob*ects of the 'ct arranging for the specification of classification and context standards by the National 3ualifications 'uthority via consultative central co-ordinating committees planning, organising and updating a programme of work by the awarding bodies with regard to carrying out their functions under the 'ct organising domains and&or occupational sectors to determine context standards for awards in the different classifications, and to summarise the composition of each context setting and developing content and performance standards by providers of education and training sub*ect to principles, criteria and guidelines established by the awarding bodies for their subse uent validation validation by awarding bodies of course and programme development submitted by providers of education and training with particular regard to context and content standards audits by awarding bodies of the processes and procedures used by providers of education and training evaluation by awarding bodies of re uests for delegated authority to make awards by the providers of education and training audit and review by the National 3ualifications 'uthority of the processes of awarding bodies recognising and recording awards in the national ualifications framework ensuring that the specifications of awards of the framework are applied consistently by users ensuring that standards are at least comparable to those obtaining at the highest level in (urope and consistent with the most up-to-date international benchmarks promoting confidence in the ualifications of the National 3ualifications %ramework by means of a public relations, marketing and research strategy aimed at increased transparency of uality access, progression, transfer, articulation and mobility with particular attention to sectoral strengths and pathway development. 4.3 &uality and standards de#elop ent Tasks and processes need to be carried out in relation to performance in all elements of the system. The establishment of a national ualifications framework, developed on a basis of subsidiarity, partnership and authority will re uire the involvement of all partners and end-users in the processes of setting, developing, implementing and maintaining nationally agreed standards that have relevance in terms of their flexible application to regional and local contexts, and to international benchmarks. The processes and mechanisms by which this can

be achieved are discussed in the $ssues 2aper on &uality *ssurance and 2 pro#e ent. 'chieving uality is a delicate balance between subsidiarity, partnership and authority. 'n authoritarian emphasis, or simple recourse to legal framework, is not sufficient on its own. 'uthority must be balanced by careful devolution of responsibility and control, enhancement of motivation, and optimisation of the holistic benefits of partnership. Clearly, in relation to people, unlike products, uality cannot be imposed. $t is a truism that uality in this respect must be earned through sustained and focused co-operation, and confidence building. The National 3ualifications 'uthority would determine the principles, processes and practices by which national standards should be classified. The 'uthority would also decide in consultation with all stakeholders the details of the system by which a standards-based approach to uality would be implemented and developed in the transition period. 'ccordingly, the 'uthority in the first instance would seek to determine classification standards at national level. $n doing so, it would establish a number of central co-ordinating committees, e.g. national standards committees ANSCsB in order to consult with and receive the advice of all relevant interests and stakeholders. NSCs would also advise on the range of context standards that should apply within each classification. Consideration should also be given to the need for an NSC which would focus on cross-domain learning, including such areas of learning as- 2ersonal, interpersonal and intrapersonal development - Communications - $nformation Technology - Self-directed ,earning - and others. 4.4 2n#ol#ing business3 industry and the social partners The awarding bodies would receive, from the National 3ualifications 'uthority, the classification and content standards to be applied in the various domains of learning. The development of content and performance standards from the given classification and context standards should in particular be a matter for the users of awards and ualifications, vi!., employers, and the social partners generally, and the providers of education and training with an appropriate contribution from learners (xperienced providers of education and training would be in a strong position to ensure the total relevance of their courses and programmes if they had available

to them the needs, insights, best practice and know-how of business and industry. #hile strategic business and industry interests would be included in the various NSCs, it would be appropriate to consider how a more fundamental and institutional involvement of the workplace could be included in the process of developing standards and ensuring their relevance in that regard also. $t would appear both reasonable and appropriate that Awarding bodies should consult directly and substantively with the workplace in terms of standards development and implementation. To this end, awarding bodies should consider establishing, in consultation with the National 3ualifications 'uthority, occupational sector committees A+SCsB representative of business and industry! including the social partners . These committees would be expected to provide advice to the awarding bodies on inter alia the relevance of the context standards to be implemented on behalf of the National 3ualifications 'uthority. Specifically, committees would be re uested to submit a general specification of the nature of the content relevant to each context standard and to undertake significant pro*ects in that regard as part of the task of advising the awarding bodies. $n considering the number of +SCs re uired to advise the National 3ualifications 'uthority, attention might be focused on the broad domains of learning that operate in the $nstitutes of Technology, further education colleges and other education and training centres. <road areas such as Science and Computers, (ngineering and Technology, <usiness and %inance and 'rts and 0umanities may provide a valuable starting point from which to identify appropriate occupational sectors. +ther approaches to the definition of sectors and the role of such committees are discussed more fully in $ssues 2aper 9 +perational =echanisms for the $nvolvement of <usiness and $ndustry. 4.5 Courses and progra es lin(ed to standards

The awarding bodies would establish principles, criteria and guidelines for setting, developing and monitoring both content and performance standards by the providers of education and training. This would also involve the range of assessment modes to be used and the balance to be achieved between internal and external approaches to assessment. Sub*ect to the aforementioned principles, criteria and guidelines, the awarding bodies would re uire experienced pro"iders of education and training , who wished to offer a new course or programme, to set the relevant standards in the first instance. 'ccordingly, providers would translate the general specification of context standards and any other relevant aspects into content standards in each case, before submitting these to the awarding bodies for validation. This approach would be used for all new course or programme development which would subse uently be validated by the awarding bodies. 2roviders would

be re uested to review any existing course or programme post hoc on the same basis. $n this way, pro"iders of education and training would be expected to set and deliver content standards for all courses and programmes which they operate. $n other cases, detailed content and performance standards for awards could be made available by the awarding body to providers seeking to engage in new development or areas of delivery in which they may not have had previous experience. These standards provide the basis for programme development by the provider. $n addition, the awarding bodies would determine the criteria which they would use to systematically audit the processes of education and training providers, and to conduct reviews as appropriate. The awarding bodies would also arrange for the conduct of any re uests for delegated authority by providers. 4.! Path'ays 3ualifications should always relate to effective performance in the workplace. To take this view is in no way to espouse a narrow or instrumentalist prescription for the goals of education and training. +n the contrary, nowadays, performance in the workplace must include the various extensions underpinning breadth, depth and balance in education as well as the social, cultural and aesthetic dimensions. $n addition, the effects of globalisation are such that the workplace today may be a firm, a region, a country, (urope or the world. 'lso, education and training specialists are well capable of setting a workplace perspective within the full context of education and training delivery when designing courses and programmes. The primary goal of a particular ualification should never be set as a /stepping stone/ leading immediately to another ualification, although that possibility should not be excluded in practice and may well occur in a significant number of cases. ' ualification, once achieved, should be put to immediate use in the workplace, wherever possible. $t is only the immediate application of a ualification in that way that can add full validity to it and result in the achievement of professionalism in the particular discipline concerned. 2athways to awards should always focus on the ultimate achievement of a ualification. +ne must always decide at least in general terms where one wishes to get to before one sets out on a particular route or pathway. $t is the tendency that exists for people to engage in some form or area of learning without considering the ultimate destination or outcome that often leads to subse uent disappointment in terms of the existence or otherwise of a coherent pathway. The importance of effective vocational guidance is very evident in this regard.

Courses and programmes need to be designed in relation to the ualifications framework in such a way that they provide a pathway to a ualification, which may be undertaken all at once or in more manageable chunks or modules. $n that way, it should always be possible to receive credit for a particular ualification or part thereof. 'lternatively, a particular course or programme while not providing a pathway to a ualification should give credit as if it was one of the /paving stones/ on the pathway to, perhaps more than one option of, a ualification. 4.. *rticulation 'rticulation involves the optimisation of progression and transfer at the critical interfaces between different systems of awards, e.g. between vocational education and training awards and higher education awards. $n such circumstances, credit deficits may need to be addressed to enable learners to progress and&or transfer effectively, and this process can assist the development of a national credit scheme. ,inks between different pathways may be structural or award-related. The links between certain NCC' awards and the certificate courses of the $nstitutes of Technology is an example of a structural link. $t is also an award-related link having regard to certain NCC' ,evel 9 awards being accepted as entry level to national certificate courses, thereby providing a clear and transparent linkage or point of articulation. The establishment of structural links involves both the relevant awarding body and providing institutions. 'warding bodies play a role in recognising that linked awards are meeting the approved Ausually minimumB entry re uirements for their awards. Such articulation arrangements also involve recognition by the relevant institution that the applicant5s award meets the entry re uirements for a particular programme and so will accept entrants on that basis. ' national ualifications framework can provide the basis for establishing transparent criteria for those seeking access to learning programmes and to ualifications of the framework.

5 -aintenance of the %ational &ualifications Fra e'or(

5.1 The end of the transition phase #ithin the transition phase the national ualifications framework will have been established, developed and in effect fully implemented. The responsibility of the National 3ualifications 'uthority for the overall assurance of the uality of national awards and the framework will also have been established. 'udits, reviews and other uality assurance measures will have been activated and systematised. 't this stage, the maintenance of the framework and the uality

assurance and other systems supporting it will become the new imperative. 0owever, ongoing development will also continue to be re uired including the marketing of $rish ualifications at home and abroad as meeting the highest international standards and uality. 5.2 -aintaining the national $ualifications fra e'or( %ollowing its full implementation after a transition period, a number of tasks will be involved in maintaining the framework, including inter alia accrediting, recognising and recording awards in the framework ensuring the specifications of the framework are applied consistently by all users auditing and reviewing the processes of awarding bodies continuing the development and maintenance of a national database of awards promoting confidence in the ualifications of the framework, nationally and internationally progressing the international recognition of ualifications ' key re uirement will be to ensure that everybody concerned is playing a role in implementing and maintaining the uality of the systems and the framework. $n doing so, it will be necessary to optimise the principles of partnership and subsidiarity in order to underpin the operation of authority on the basis of leadership rather than sanctions. 5.3 The essential role of independent research $ndependent research involving appropriate expertise is a powerful mechanism for highlighting issues, problems and lacunae. 4esearch can be used to pose practical solutions in ways that would not otherwise be possible. $n addition, the uestions posed by independent research call for answers, explanations and proposals for change as well as for the better focusing of resources for the benefit of learners in particular. 5.4 4ther issues and positions ' number of other papers explore more fully the issues and positions relating to the establishment, development, implementation and maintenance of the national ualifications framework, including matters of uality assurance and improvement. 'mong the other papers referred to are the following2ssues Paper 1 3uality 'ssurance and $mprovement

and the National 3ualifications %ramework 2ssues Paper 2 +perational =echanisms for the $nvolvement of <usiness and $ndustry

' 4eview of $ssues 4elating to the 5esearch Paper >esign and +peration of a National 1 Credit System $ssues 4elating to the >evelopment 5esearch Paper and $mplementation of a National 2 Credit System Position Paper 1 'chieving a National 3ualifications %ramework Position Paper 2 Position Paper 3 6lossary ' Template for >eveloping the National 3ualifications %ramework ' Strategy for >eveloping a National Credit System Terminology of the National 3ualifications %ramework