Recognition of Non-Formal and Informal Learning in some OECD Countries: Theory and Evidence Recognition of Non-Formal and Informal Learning in some OECD

Recognition of Non-FormalRecognition of Non-Formaland Informal Learning in some OECD and Informal Learning in some OECD

Countries: Theory and EvidenceCountries: Theory and Evidence

Dr. Patrick Werquin*

REACTION Conference on:Accreditation of Prior Experiential Learning in Different Sectors

Ghent, 13-14 September 2007

(* the opinions expressed in this power point presentation are those of the author alone)

Agenda for today- Background

- Why do we want to organise recognition programmes?

- Why it doesn’t necessarily work?

- Some evidence and concluding remarks

Patrick Werquin, REACTION Conference on APEL, Ghent, 13 September 2007

Agenda for today- Background Background





Background-Lots of evidence about Recognition° of Non Formal and Informal Learning° (RNFIL), but piecemeal

-Adult Learning°: an important component of lifelong learning

-Growing awareness of the role of national qualifications systems* to promote lifelong learning


The Main Idea: NQS -> LLL.

Good supply Excellent supply ?

NQS LLL

This link is identified as mechanisms


Qualifications Systems

- RNFIL = mechanism to create more and better lifelong learning

- as well as:- credit transfer system- qualifications framework*- stakeholders involvement - information and guidance- …


A Typical Example:Adult Learning

- Motivation is the key issue

… and since for many people, learning seems to be a waste of time and money

=> Don’t ask adults to start from scratch!!!!!


Another Example: Self Learning.Literacy Level and Educational Attainment


Among Adults Low Literacy High Literacy

Low educational attainment

High educational attainment

40%

40%10%

10%

Terms and Concepts

Many terms even in English only:- RPL (Australia), PLAR (Canada), APL or APEL (UK), Ireland uses them all...

- RAS (Recognition of Acquired Skills)- (Recognition of previous knowledge )- Recognition of Learning Outcomes

Other languages:- EVC (Belgium Flanders, Netherlands), VAE (France)…


Terms and Concepts (cont’d)

- In Australia, they even made RPL a verb: “I will RPL you”, “not everybody can be RPLed”...

- I like “Recognition of non formal and informal learning – RNFIL” because it says what it does*° (formal is out, RPL?)

- Even is some claims we should say: “Recognition of non formal and informal learning outcomes”


Definitions of NFIL - It’s a nightmare! No consensus whatsoever; tentatively:- Formal Learning: organised, intentional, with learning objectives, leading to qualification°

- Informal learning: none of the above, what we do all the time everywhere without even knowing it (key issue for documenting skills), does NOT usually lead to a qualification°

- Non-Formal Learning: could be organised, may have learning objectives or happen alongside other more formal learning activities, does NOT usually lead to a qualification°

- Nothing very convincing, some odd definitions (Statistics), a lot of overlap anyway

- It does not work!!! Patrick Werquin, REACTION Conference on APEL, Ghent, 13 September 2007

More Definitions

- Recognition, Validation, Certification: in what order?

Recognition (technical)

=> Validation (against standards)

=> Certification (stamp)

=> Recognition (social)*

- Social recognition not specific to RNFIL, same in the formal learning system: it’s about recognition of a qualification

- And the issue is that in both cases, it should come FIRST!!!- (I would keep “accreditation” for institutions )


More About Recognition

There is:-Technical Recognition-and Social Recognition-But also: Practical Recognition

- And there is recognition of learning [outcomes] and recognition of qualification(s)

- For non native English speakers, it could be a bit difficult


Definitions: Some Pieces of Advice

-Don’t panic-Don’t waste too much time debating them-Choose the ones that meets your needs for the following 2-3 years and stop re-addressing the issue all the time

-If/whenever possible, use international definitions (OECD, 2007; CEDEFOP, 2008)

- I’m focusing today on “Formal recognition of non-formal and informal learning”; key word: VISIBILITY*


Why Focussing on RNFIL ?

-Because we need more research!!!!

-Rationale for focussing on RNFIL: -Economic benefits (esp. in the workplace)-Educational benefits-Social benefits-Psychological benefits

-Key Issues:-Technical and institutional arrangements-Indicator, data*-Good – and bad – practice-Develop pilot models


Why?

Above all, because RNFIL appears to be among the possible solutions to address key issues!!!!



- Why do we want to organise recognition Why do we want to organise recognition programmes?programmes?




Why?

- No more lifetime jobs (Japan???)

-Demography (Ageing, labour force shortages, work after retirement age, labour market, education system, tertiary education…)

- Skills mismatch (make skills visible for governments to organise learning provision; for individuals to perform well in the labour market and/or to (re)enter LLL system at the most optimal level)


Why?

- Inequities (women in labour market, gender issues in the VET initial system, immigrants: unqualified to make their skills visible as well as qualified to organise equivalencies)

- Immigrants do fill some skills gaps – UK – but there maybe issues in terms of safety, security or health (Nurses)


Why?

-Migration and mobility in general (workers, students)

- Second chance (identify skills of poorly qualified people to certify them) – safety net

Second chance for NEET people, for instance


Why?

-Impact/role of other devices/programmes(such as qualifications frameworks (EQF typically) set in motion – based on learning outcomes, also the essence of RNFIL)

- May not create economic growth, but will help sustain it!!!

-Note these are only objectives: little of now evidence so far

-RNFIL does NOT create skills, it make them VISIBLE, if there are some!!!




- Why it doesn’t necessarily work?Why it doesn’t necessarily work?

-Some evidence and concluding remarks


Employers*- Employers may see wider skills supply if more learning is recognised in the workforce

- May need workforce with qualifications (ISO, existing regulations and regulated labour market…)

- In theory individuals coming from RNFIL should be better*

- But:

- Is it less costly (time and money)?

- This might lead to a reduction in commitment to formal training programmes

- Ownership of the standards will may remain an issue for a long time; going beyond the standards even more of an issue


Trade Unions

- Sceptical – at best

- Shift of focus from learning to assessing


Providers of learning- Worried!!!! OF COURSE(US higher education institutions and universities)

- Nevertheless, providers may be encouraged to widen access to programmes if quality assured recognition systems are in place

- Documenting skills may save some subsystems (Folk high schools in Norway???)

- Although there may be increased direct and indirect costs involved in recognising non-formal and informal learning

- May create additional qualifications (Mexico)

- Ownership of the standards


Providers of qualifications

- OK!!!! OF COURSE

-But same worries about cost…


Individuals

-System still not transparent, not at all

-Access not easy

-Information and guidance still lacking

-Doesn’t happen for low qualified people – second Matthew effect

-Most people would deny they have skills

=> Individuals are not fully convinced yetPatrick Werquin, REACTION Conference on APEL, Ghent, 13 September 2007

Governments- ???

- ???(Hungary…)

- We have to interest not only Ministry of Education, but also Ministries of Finance, Labour… It must have to do with employment and unemployment*





- Some evidence and Some evidence and concluding remarksconcluding remarks


Pieces of Evidence (1/3)

- Labour market experience vs. Life experience- France (VAP in 1992->VAE in 2002), Iceland (nothing about working life,

Slovenia: all about working life)

- Importance of the economic context- Virtually no unemployment Norway, Iceland

- Sustainability?? Usefulness??

- Qualifications framework: does it help?- Learning outcomes, EQF // Australia, Ireland, NZL, S-Africa, UK...

- See Bjørnåvold in Duvekot et al. (2007)

- Confusion between teachers and assessors, training?- Australia-Australia, Norway a bit better



- Involvement of stakeholders: Key element- Norway // - if not: law (Flemish Belgium, Slovenia...)

- Creation of intermediary qualification: Way out- Partial qualification

- But also full qualification at intermediate level (Mexico)

- Practical recognition vs. Formal recognition- Informal recognition // - UK, Australia

- Information and guidance- vs. Complexity // - All countries



- Need for a clear rationale and a [national] rhetoric- Is it always good to codify all kind of learning?

- Why do countries want to do it???

- Norway, Australia, Slovenia, Hungary

- Existence of, or need for, a legal framework- A lot of countries have one

- Standards for validating- Education vs. Labour market

- Ownerships of the standards

- Occupations standards to be up-to-date so that qualifications based on occupational standards do have value for employers


m e r c im e r c i

[email protected]


Why is RNFIL a Mechanism?

Recognition systems for non-formal and informal learning make explicit the value of learning that is not assessed as part of a formal learning programme. This kind of recognition can act as a safety net for those who have not yet fully engaged with learning.

IndividualsIndividuals with relatively low levels of formal achievement might be motivated to enter programmes and continue learning if their knowledge, skills and wider competences acquired through experience can be recognised and used to reduce the costs of qualification.

EmployersEmployers may see wider skills supply if more learning is recognised in the workforce. On the other hand this might lead to a reduction in commitment to formal training programmes. May be interested in spotting more motivated individuals, and therefore workers potentially more productive.

ProvidersProviders may be encouraged to widen access to programmes if quality assured recognition systems are in place. Although there may be increased direct and indirect costs involved in recognising non-formal and informal learning.


Documents

Recognition of Non-Formal and Informal Learning in some OECD Countries: Theory and Evidence Recognition of Non-Formal and Informal Learning in some OECD