Duration
36 months
General approach/description of the project
The project “Value Learning Outcomes in the Grande Région” (VaLOGReg) works in the context of the so-called “Grande Région”. The Grande Région is at the junction of four different countries (Belgium, France, Germany and Luxembourg) and is formed of the following regions: Saar-Lorraine, Luxembourg, Rheinland-Pfalz and Wallonie. The region is marked by significant cross-border working population: around 180.000 people cross the border daily in order to work in another region. Many enterprises settled in this area are active in the whole Grande Région. In addition many people cross the border for learning purposes.
Several of the countries concerned (namely Germany and Luxembourg) have put in place legislations stating that parts of training can be undertaken abroad. Nevertheless, despite this political willingness, there is currently no formal framework for recognition, with the exception of certain regulated professions. The existence of four different training systems and two different languages presents an additional challenge to the recognition process.
In order to support recognition, it is important to develop mutual trust and understanding between the different actors of vocational training in the five regions involved. VaLOGReg aims at providing solutions to real‐life learning situations in this region, by facilitating the recognition of learning outcomes, without prolonging the training period.
VaLOGReg focuses on two professional qualifications in the fields of:
- Electronics in energy and building technology (EQF 4 - tentative referencing to EQF levels, not officially allocated ); and
- Car mechanics (EQF 3 - tentative referencing to EQF levels, not officially allocated)
The VaLOGReg Project is structured around three phases:
- Analysis of the different qualification systems and their structure in the four countries, taking into account the current legislative developments and reforms in the vocational training field for each country.
- Elaboration of a common understanding between all the different national partners of the Grande Région. The project aims to establish Memoranda of Understanding setting the broad framework for cooperation between partners whilst learning agreements will operationalise mobility arrangements between the ‘pairs’.
- Finally, a testing mobility phase.
Stakeholder involvement is a key aspect of the project. From the start VaLOGreg has involved stakeholders competent for the management and delivery of the two qualifications identified. This will guarantee their commitment in the future and ease the establishment of a regional learning area.
Target group
The target group includes underage pupils, students studying part-time, students working part-time and adults in initial training. The group is mixed, and not based on a specific age. The project is focused on the electronics in energy and building sector and car mechanics sector.
Dissemination
The final conference of the project took place on January 26 in Luxembourg.
The final project report is forthcoming.
Transfer And Accumulation
Approach and tools
What will be transferred from one context to another is not one unit but a ‘bundle’ of learning outcomes.
Home and host institutions will determine, when signing the learning agreement, what will be validated and transferred at the end of the mobility period (i.e. which learning outcomes). The learning outcomes to be transferred are not identified a priori by the project steering group and the experts.
Experts have identified key activities and corresponding broad “learning fields”. For qualifications related to car mechanics there are 7 learning fields common to all qualifications. They constitute a framework within which recognition and transfer will be possible. It will be the role of the ‘pairs’ (home/host institutions) to identify, within this framework, the learning outcomes that can be the basis for mobility. Each pair will therefore validate, transfer and recognise different learning outcomes. Given the short mobility period, partners cannot organise mobility on all the common fields and will only work within one learning field.
How learning outcomes will be validated and recognised
The approach chosen is that each ‘pair’ will agree beforehand on how many learning outcomes will be validated and recognised.
Recognition in VaLOGReg will be driven by the fact that partners do not transfer units. If the ‘bundle’ of learning outcomes assessed and validated in the host country corresponds to a whole module or unit at home, then the home institution will not assess this unit/module a second time. If the learning outcomes correspond to part of a module or unit, these will be fully assessed in the home country, but the learner will be exempted from the learning activity corresponding to these learning outcomes.
In Germany and Luxembourg where learning outcomes correspond to part of the training pathway and not part of the qualification (because the qualification is only awarded after the final exam and not acquired progressively), the learning outcomes will be assessed again as part of the final assessment.
The way learning outcomes will be recognised will depend on the logic of each national system. The condition to respect is that the learning activity will not be repeated in the home country.
Assessment
Following the description of the qualifications in activities, tasks and learning outcomes, the experts working on electronics described in detail the learning outcomes corresponding to the activities and tasks identified in the ‘learning fields’ common to all qualifications. They indicated the indicators to be used for assessment for each learning outcome (e.g. “the technical file is completed includes the conditions to carry out the installation or equipment”). The teachers who will host the learners during the mobility phase took part in the working group.
The same exercise remains to be done by the car mechanics experts.
A common template/grid for assessment is being developed by the experts and will be provided to the institutions implementing mobility to avoid using disparate instruments. However the idea is that the details concerning assessment will be decided and refined by the ‘pairs’ when they discuss the learning agreement.
Institutions, if they decide to sign with another institution, should trust each other and accept their assessment methods. There is no need to include a description of assessment methods and criteria in the MoU.
Elements to be further explored
This project is working in a long term perspective of recognising learning outcomes a posteriori (not necessarily through a prior agreement), designing an approach that would enable to recognise the achievements of mobile learners who study abroad at their own initiative. Therefore, each country will decide what learning outcomes it recognises. (E.g. a French learner goes to Germany, acquires learning outcomes and then goes back to France where the home institution accepts to recognise 3 learning outcomes. From the same ‘package’ a Belgian institution might recognise only 2 learning outcomes).
Units of learning outcomes
Method
The key element driving the project’s approach is the respect of cultural diversity with regard to national qualification systems. The intention is not to harmonise the different systems. Rather, the aim is to work on transparency and legibility of the learning outcomes common to the qualifications in all the regions concerned.
The work undertaken consisted in:
- Reviewing the qualifications to define their EQF level;
- Regional/national analysis of qualifications towards the ECVET concepts (e.g. units, learning outcomes).
- Comparison and matching at the Grande region level to determine:
- compatibility or congruence of the learning outcomes
- criteria for the transferability & accumulation of units
- criteria for assessment of the learning outcomes
A workshop gathering experts in electronics and car mechanics resulted in the observation that the four qualifications considered were very similar and that 90% of the learning outcomes overlapped (only 10% of divergence, in particular in the diagnostic of engine failure and relations with clients).
Challenges
The experts found out that the term ‘unit’ is understood and used very differently in the four contexts. All the countries in the partnership have some form of units in their qualification such as ‘modules’ or ‘lernfelder’ (learning fields) but these cannot really be compared or matched. As a result the project considered it not possible to find in the different qualifications units that would be exactly the same. An alternative would be to create specific units for mobility.
A problem that arises in practice, when it comes to recognition of parts of qualifications (units) if the full qualification has not been achieved, is the fact that the relationship between units and the training programme differs. While in some systems (qualifications) the progression is linear and the learner progresses to learning outcomes with higher responsibility, progressively accumulating elements of the qualification, in others this is not the case. There is no logic of progressive accumulation and the learner only achieves the certified learning outcomes at the end of the training programme.
Another difference in the organisation of the training pathway is that in Germany for instance the training pathway is organised in a linear structure whilst in Luxembourg the training programme is structured as a ‘spiral’, where the same learning outcomes are taught at different moments of the pathway with each time an increasing degree of complexity.
The different timing in the organisation of the learning process therefore poses a difficulty for mobility. What is problematic is not the content of the qualifications (as 90% is common), but the relationship between the qualification and the training programme.
Lessons learnt
Qualifications were reviewed according to the ECVET criteria, and then described with a grid distinguishing activities, tasks and learning outcomes. The idea was to compare the training standards with a focus on learning outcomes. The work of the experts on the qualification standards concluded that it was possible to establish mobility and recognition on a number of ‘learning fields’ which correspond to key activities.
Experts agreed that the project would not use units for the transfer of competences acquired in another context, but only learning outcomes.
This is why the project differs from the other ECVET projects: it does not seek to design and cut out common units into the national qualifications, but to identify identical learning outcomes. To avoid confusion and problems of compatibility of units that correspond to different concepts, VaLOGREeg will work on the basis of learning outcomes only.
The advantage of the approach is that there is no need to harmonise the methodology which underlies the qualifications or to structure the national qualification in units.
The disadvantage of this approach is that mobility is NOT facilitated by a quasi‐automatic transfer and recognition of learning achievements.
The recognition of the learning outcomes acquired and validated in other systems will depend on the efficiency of the tools designed to insure transparency.
ECVET Points
Given that the project will not work with Units, partners agreed that it would not make sense to use points. Points only make sense if points are attributed to the units of a qualification. In addition, none of the qualification systems in the partnership have a system of points related to units.
Consolidation of partnerships in formal agreements
The project is now working on the finalisation of the Memorandum of Understanding which will be signed by the competent authorities in the three countries.
The definition of competent institution varies from one country to the next. In Luxembourg this is the Ministry of education for the delivery of certification. In Belgium IFAPME is competent to deliver certification, but occupation standards are the competence of the Ministry of Education. In Germany the situation is specific because of the dual system, it is still to be determined whether the Ministry of Education and the professional Chamber must sign the MoU.
The MoU defines the general ‘framework’ within which the mobility between schools will be possible, leaving room for flexibility, as it does not identify specific learning outcomes for transfer and recognition, but only broad ‘learning fields’ (and not units). This means that the MoU must acknowledge that training providers do have sufficient autonomy to decide which LOs acquired abroad they will recognise (as long as they belong the ‘learning fields’ agreed upon). These LOs will be taken into account in the training pathway (no repetition of the learning activity), not necessarily as a part of the qualification.
At a later stage the learning agreements between the training centres hosting the learners will be finalised. These learning agreements will be the key documents for the mobility of learners, insofar as the ‘pairs’ will identify the learning outcomes that will be transferred and validated at the end of the mobility period. Learning agreements will be the operational documents, more detailed and constraining than the MoU. This approach is possible because training providers in the 3 regions have a degree of autonomy that enables them to make decisions on issues such as validation, recognition, assessment etc.
Learning agreements must be understandable for the learner (or his family).
The mobility phase took place at the end of 2010 and in early 2011 and lasted 2-3 weeks; to disrupt the organisation of the learning pathway in the home country as little as possible. Learners went to the host country at that point in time when the learning activities corresponding to the LOs selected for mobility took place.
Areas for further exploration
For learning outcomes which do not fit with the qualification in the system where the learner seeks recognition (e.g. client counselling), these could be documented in Europass Mobility of experience and be recognised not in the qualification system but on the labour market – if the employers are interested in such knowledge, skills and competence.
However at this stage it is foreseen that partners will only work with the learning fields identified by the experts as being common to all qualification standards.
Partnership
Project Promoters:
Lycée Technique d’Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg
Ministère de l’Education nationale et de la formation professionnelle, Luxembourg
Partners:
Institut wallon de formation en alternance et des indépendantes et petites et moyennes entreprises, Wallonie, Belgium
Ministerium für Bildung, Familie, Frauen und Kultur, Saarland, Germany
Ministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft, Jugend und Kultur / Abteilung, Berufsbildende Schulen, Rheinland-Pfalz, Germany
Formation tout au long de la vie, Lorraine, France
Lead organisation contact details
Mr Jos NOESEN: [email protected]
Website
The project is not planning to create a website. However it regularly publishes a Newsletter (once every semester over the next three years).
This first edition presented the background, the approach, the final objectives and the partners of the project. The second Newsletter presents the results of the expert group who worked on comparing the qualifications of the partnership (see section 'more information').