1. Its emergence and application in selected European countries Mari Elken (UiO/NATED) Poznan, 03.09.09

2.  policy in a multi-level and multi-centered setting, involving large numbers of actors, institutions and processes (Olsen 2005)  increasingly difficult to differentiate between European and national policies => understanding the integration processes also offers a key to the change processes within higher education in Europe, but European level has not replaced other levels of governance (Gornitzka et al 2007)

3.  Mismatch in definitions, understandings and interests, but ->  ”Strong convictions and weak evidence” (Olsen & Maassen 2006)

4.  A qualification is 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 (European Commission 2008).  From being a national responsibility to European policy discussions

5.  NQF as ‘a practical solution to real political, economic and educational problems /…/, and the often unrealistic expectations about what the introduction of an NQF will achieve.’.  Difference between ‘general idea of a single qualifications framework that is common to a country or group of countries and the very different ways in which the idea of a framework has been taken up in different countries.’ (Young 2002)

6.  a basis for the measurement of private provision and the regulation and control of public provision (Allais 2007)  A tool for creating trust (Ministry of Technology and Education, Denmark)  Developments started on national level

7.  processes of recognizing vocational qualifications started already with the Treaty of Rome in 1957  In 1975 - CEDEFOP, in 1985 a process of establishing comparability of qualifications was started -> few results at the time.  1998 European Forum on Transparency of Qualifications  2002 – The Europass initiative started, established 2004 (Bouder 2008, Paulsen 2007)

8.  During the last ten [now almost 20] years, has been a call for more mutual recognition, transferability and transparency of qualifications (Brennan & Shah 2000a).  Bologna as a first remote step towards overarching qualifications framework?  National and international initiatives followed

9.  2005 Bergen meeting  Emphasis that it should not be standardized, national ownership  QF-EHEA as a meta-framework

10.  Copenhagen process and VET as a starting point but... it grew larger.

11.  ”a translation device”  The EQF was signed on 23 rd of April in 2008  “promote citizens’ mobility between countries and to facilitate their lifelong learning” (European Commission 2008)

12.  8 levels  Knowledge - theoretical and/or factual.  Skills – cognitive (involving the use of logical, intuitive and creative thinking) and practical (involving manual dexterity and the use of methods, materials, tools and instruments).  Competence – responsibility and autonomy.

13. L1L1Basic general knowledge L2Basic factual knowledge of a field of work or study L3Knowledge of facts, principles, processes and general concepts, in a field of work or study L4factual and theoretical knowledge in broad contexts within a field of work or study L5comprehensive, specialised, factual and theoretical knowledge within a field of work or study and an awareness of the boundaries of that knowledge L6advanced knowledge of a field of work or study, involving a critical understanding of theories and principles L7- highly specialised knowledge, some of which is at the forefront of knowledge in a field of work or study, as the basis for original thinking and/or research - critical awareness of knowledge issues in a field and at the interface between different fields L8knowledge at the most advanced frontier of a field of work or study and at the interface between fields

14. L1L1basic skills required to carry out simple tasks L2basic cognitive and practical skills required to use relevant information in order to carry out tasks and to solve routine problems using simple rules and tools L3a range of cognitive and practical skills required to accomplish tasks and solve problems by selecting and applying basic methods, tools, materials and information L4a range of cognitive and practical skills required to generate solutions to specific problems in a field of work or study L5a comprehensive range of cognitive and practical skills required to develop creative solutions to abstract problems L6advanced skills, demonstrating mastery and innovation, required to solve complex and unpredictable problems in a specialised field of work or study L7specialised problem-solving skills required in research and/or innovation in order to develop new knowledge and procedures and to integrate knowledge from different fields L8the 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

15. L1L1 work or study under direct supervision in a structured context L2 work or study under supervision with some autonomy L3 - take responsibility for completion of tasks in work or study - adapt own behaviour to circumstances in solving problems L4 - exercise self-management within the guidelines of work or study contexts that are usually predictable, but are subject to change - supervise the routine work of others, taking some responsibility for the evaluation and improvement of work or study activities L5 - exercise management and supervision in contexts of work or study activities where there is unpredictable change - review and develop performance of self and others L6 -manage complex technical or professional activities or projects, taking responsibility for decision- making in unpredictable work or study contexts - take responsibility for managing professional development of individuals and groups L7 - manage and transform work or study contexts that are complex, unpredictable and require new strategic approaches - take responsibility for contributing to professional knowledge and practice and/or for reviewing the strategic performance of teams L8 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

16.  No legal commitment, voluntary  No explicit rhetorics of harmonization  Optimism and scepticism, as always

17.  European level ideas and capabilities  European ambitions meet national realities (Gornitzka et al 2007)  Need to understand the interaction between the two, no simple adaptation

18.  European level analysis  Case studies and cross-country comparisons of selected European countries (Norway, Ireland, Estonia)

19.  What were the necessary conditions, the rationale and ambition behind the emergence of EQF? Who were the key actors in this process and what was their role?  The role and legitimation of EC in the process  Implementation/effects - recommendation vs regulation?  How does the process fit into the broader context of europeanisation?

20.  What is the relationship between national policy agendas (various internal actors) and European initiatives?  How are the National Qualifications Frameworks being developed? (process, actors, negotiations, dynamics)  What is the role of EC (EQF) vs Bologna (QF-EHEA) in the national policy developments?

21. Thank you!