1. A Nordic model for Quality in Validation Seminar in Stockholm May 29. 2013 A Nordplus-project Anne Marie Dahler – Håkon Grunnet NVR - Danmark

2. Project-partners Island: Specialist VPL Haukur Hardason, Frædslumidstöd, Reykjavik. (ETSC - Education and Training Service Centre) Norge: Senior Advisor Camilla Alfsen, VOX – Nationalt Fagorgan for Kompetansepolitikk, Oslo ( 2011-12: Seniorrådgiver Margrethe Steen Hernes, VOX) Sverige: Pär Sellberg, Myndigheten for Yrkeshögskolan, Västerås. (Swedish National Agency for Higher Vocational Education) (2011-12: Anna Kahlson, Myndigheten for Yrkeshögskolan, Västerås) Finland: Expert in European Educational Policy Anni Karttunen, Savon Koulutuskuntayhtymä, Kuopio (Savo Consortium for Education) Danmark: associate professor Anne Marie Dahler and consultant Håkon Grunnet, Nationalt Videnscenter for Realkompetence, Aarhus May 29 2013

3. Quality in Validation – the project 2 years – one project (2011-12, 2012-13) First: a mapping project ( 5 country-reports) 5 country-reports Second: making an operational model for work with Quality in Validation Nordic cooperation  a ‘Nordic model’. A generic model for quality assurance (?) Steering-group: Nordiskt Expertnätverk för Validering. NVL – Nordiskt Nätverk för Vuxnas LärandeNordiskt Expertnätverk för Validering. Supportet by NORDPLUS – AdultNORDPLUS – Adult May 29 2013

4. Quality in Validation? “The establishment of and adherence to policies, processes and assessment practices that maximize individuals’ opportunities to fully and accurately demonstrate relevant knowledge, skills and competencies” (Joy Van Kleef) Van Kleef points to different general mechanisms that can be applied to quality in validation. These are as follows: Legislation Government policies Collaborative mechanisms Institution-based mechanisms Indirect stakeholder support May 29 2013

5. 3 perspectives on quality in validation 1.Ensuring organisational quality –Through a holistic approach for institutions work on validation of prior learning –Through evaluation cadences, feedback, and improvement initiatives at all levels 2.Ensuring assessment quality –Through distinct criteria –Through substantiated choices of methodology –Through establishing of evaluation and documentation practice 3.Ensuring procedural quality, around the assessment –Through distinct responsibility and role distribution (who does what, when, and for whom?) –Through presentations and information (websites, brochures, mails/letters etc.) –Through professional filing and document handling May 29 2013

6. What about the preconditions?: Legislation, government policies & collaborative mechanisms.. The term preconditions (here) means the regulatory framework for the validation work, national and local policies in the area, if validation activities are funded, and how they are funded, how co-operation with other stakeholders is organized, and if validation is based on standards or competency criteria that are known. The validation staff & the educational institution cannot change the preconditions, setting the framework for validation practice in the individual institutions. But you can reflect on, how preconditions influence the quality of the validations. May 29 2013

7. Who can use the quality model – who are the target groups? The quality model is a tool for leaders and employees at educational/advisory and other institutions working with validation (e.g. companies using validation) This means that the model is targeted towards quality assurance both at organizational level, at procedural level, and at guidance and assessment levels May 29 2013

8. The task (for the project group): Make an operationel quality-model The task is to develop a model for quality work in validation, which can be use by practitioners in there validation work. Quality developing in and by praxis Based on –The first Nordplus-project report on quality in validation in the Nordic countries, research (literature) & –Project members experiences Testing: In different institutional and sectorial contexts, different from country to country. Eg. Finland put focus on VET - level 4 both NQF and EQF for adults. May 29 2013

9. Inspiration…. Different perspectives Different models ………….many ways

10. Kriterier och riktlinjer för validering av reell kompetens (Datum: 2012-08-23 Diarienummer: YH 2012/428, page 12) May 29 2013

11. Kriterier och riktlinjer för validering av reell kompetens (Datum: 2012-08-23 Diarienummer: YH 2012/428, page 16) May 29 2013

12. Revision of the Guidelines on Validation of non formal and informal learning: first revised draft May 29 2013

13. Ministeriet for Børn og Undervisning, Uddannelsesstyrelsen, Danmark, November 2011. Rapport May 29 2013

14. A simple model – with 8 quality factors May 29 2013

15. Workscheme… May 29 2013

16. Testing: different educational level and area in each country Norway – focus on HE and exemptions Island – focus on upper secondary / lower educations including NQF level 3 EQF level 4. Sweden – focus on the sector industry organizations Finland – focus on VET - level 4 both NQF and EQF for adults Denmark – focus on third sector and 3 F (Trade union) May 29 2013

17. Interviews/ workshops with practitioners (in validation) Practically: the country representative (CR) will set up one (or more?) interviews/ workshops with relevant persons/ practitioners from the institutions/ sector, which is chosen The model and the worksheets will be presented and discussed and qualified. Is it understandable? Does the model cower all relevant aspects of quality in the validation work? Is the model useful? In which ways – and if not: why? Points of interests…! Good examples of quality work in validation? The CR will then gather information from the interviews/ workshop, summarize and qualify the material May 29 2013

18. Interviews – workshops… May 29 2013 Assessment – quality indicators: How to work with quality in validation regarding assessment?assessment? Testing the indicators Exampel: Quality faktor assessment Assessment – experiences: Experiences regarding assessment and the quality modelassessment

19. Literature… Grunnet, Håkon: ”Kvalitet i anerkendelse af realkompetencer”, in: ”Anerkendelse af realkompetencer – en grundbog”. red. K.Aagaard og A.M.Dahler (VIASystime, Aarhus & København 2010). Revision of the Guidelines on Validation of non formal and informal learning: first revised draft” (12 July 2011. Internt arbejdspapir) RKV-arbejdsgruppens rapport om anderkendelse af realkompetencer (Ministeriet for Børn og Undervisning, Uddannelsesstyrelsen, Danmark, November 2011) Van Kleef, J.: Kvalitet i vurdering og anerkendelse af realkompetencer, in: ”Anerkendelse af realkompetencer – en antologi” red. K.Aagaard og A. M.Dahler (ViaSystime, Aarhus & København 2011). Heri findes en omfattende litteraturliste. Van Kleef, J.: PLAR: Finding Quality in the Dynamics of Social Practice. PLAIO, Prior Learning Assessment Inside Out, Volume 1, Number 2, 2012 May 29 2013

20. Links CEDEFOP. (2009). European Guidelines for validating nonformal and informal learning. www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/about-cedefop/projects/validation-of-non-formal-and- informallearning/ european-guidelines.aspx www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/ COU NCIL RECOMMENDATION of 20 December 2012 on the validation of non-formal and informal learning (2012/C 398/01) http://eur- ex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:398:0001:0005:EN:PDF Kleef, Joy Van (2010). Quality in Prior Learning, Assessment and Recognition. A Background Paper. www.viauc.dk/projekter/ NVR/Documents/Kvalitetskodeks/joy%20van%20kleef%20 quality%20paper.pdf MYH – Myndigheten för Yrkeshögskolen (2012). Kriterier och riktlinjer för validering av reell kompetens (YH 2012/428) (Seek at: www.valideringsinfo.se)www.valideringsinfo.se May 29 2013

21. Thank you….