The Framework for Qualifications of the European Higher Education Area

- Implementation at the University of Copenhagen

Thomas HovmandUniversity of Copenhagen thov@adm.ku.dk

Agenda

• QF – in a political context, European and national• QF – the Danish way• Brief presentation of UC and the Danish HE framework • Working with QF at university level• Example: Faculty of Humanities• Questions?

Origins of QF in the Bologna Process

Qualifications Framework: Berlin communiqué

• Member States to elaborate a framework of comparable and compatible qualifications for their higher education systems…..

• Elaborate an overarching framework of qualifications for the EHEA

Framework for EHEA

• The EHEA framework is an overarching framework; a meta-framework or a framework for frameworks

• The 44 national frameworks are linked together through an alignment to this overarching framework of the EHEA

• Not all national qualifications will correspond to the completion of the major cycles in the overarching framework

Why an overarching framework?• International transparency• International recognition of qualifications• International mobility of learners and graduates

National Qualification Frameworks

DefinitionThe single description at national level….of an education system, which is internationally understood and through which all qualifications and other learning achievements in HE may be described and related to each other in a coherent way and which defines the relationship between HE qualifications.

(Mogens Berg, chairman of the Bologna WG on QF)

Purpose of QF

• Achieve increased transparency and recognition of degree structures – both at a national and international level

• Emphasise competence targets for each degree

• Real competences – to ease the transition from vocational/professional area to the university sector (horisontal mobility)

• Enhancing the quality of planning, approval, evaluation, accreditation and marketing of degrees

A change of orientation

The Danish Case: Why the need for a QF?

• Overall a change in thinking – directing attention away from input and toward output (finishing competences)

• A need for clearly defined and comparable levels of education structures in various sectors within HE

• A need to further mobility, credit transfer and mutual recognition

• A focus on learning outcomes to help facilitate planning better and empower students better with tangible competences to use in the labour market

• QA aspect – challenge as to how to assess these competences in exams – how do we measure competence?

The Danish WG on QF - I

• A Danish Qualification Framework has been developed by the government (2003)

• All HE institutions to implement it at their own discretion

• QF to be reviewed in 2007

• All qualifications must be systematically described &

• Internationally understood

The Danish WG on QF - II

Results of the working group:For each degree the QF must provide a general description of the:

• Overall profile of the competences achieved through the studies.• General competences that the graduate can be expected to

possess

• Competences targets – divided into three subgroups. • Specific competences that the graduate can be expected to

possess (next slide)

• Formalia – entry qualifications; length and further education

Competence targets

• The three competence targets

Intellectual competences: Analytical and abstract thinking and reasoning, ”knowledge-seeking” attitude and ability to structure ones own learning process

Academic competences: Special competences within a specific academic area and multidisciplinary competences

Practical competences: Practical skills, professional ethics and responsibility

Danish HE structures

New University Act 2003- Education reform in Denmark

• Universities become self-governing institutions• Managed by boards with external majority• Rectors, deans and other leaders are hired

• QF has to be incorporated into the framework of the description of both Bachelor and Master programmes

• All education programmes and their sub parts must be described in terms of competence

• QF hence creates the frame for the entire competence work

University of Copenhagen

• Denmark’s oldest university est. in 1479• Divided into six faculties; Theology, law, Social Science, Health Science, Science and Humanities• app. 5.000 employed • app. 33.000 students in bachelor and master programmes – 57 % of

student population female• Budget app. ½ billion EUR• All programmes built on the three cycle structure (3 + 2 + 3 – model)

• Trends, Denmark & Copenhagen in the top re. Bologna implementation

We offer:• 65 bachelor programmes• 82 second tier programmes (kandidat)• 15 master programmes (further education)

Actual work with QF at Copenhagen University

•Deans are responsible for the overall quality of the programmes

• The larger faculties with many programmes coordinates the project and tries to create common study structures

• The boards of studies are responsible for the academic performance in their own programme

Example: QF work at the Faculty of Humanities

Implementing QF• QF project initiated and controlled centrally – faculty

level • A Reform Secretariat has been established• Initially focus was on creating common definitions of

competences and the descriptions of competences• Many stakeholders involved – both internal and

external ones – to define competences and profiles of competences

• Lesson I: Things take time!

The concept of competence in an educational context

Learning outcome: Focus away from what’s actually being taught to what students must have learned

Academic competence: It’s not only about memorising a certain curricula but more about obtaining action driven academic standards: What can one actually do on the basis of what’s been taught?

Example: QF work at the Faculty of Humanities

Qualifications and competences

Qualifications are defined as the sum of knowledge, understanding and skills

Competence is an ability based on academic/professional qualifications

Example: QF work at the Faculty of Humanities

Overall profile of competences

A general description of those competences a person upon completion of an educational programme should possess

A summary of competence targets

The profile of competences is directed at the programme at its entirety

Example: QF work at the Faculty of Humanities

Competence targets

Concrete and specific expectations to a person upon completion of an educational programme

The Faculty of Humanities uses competence targets for both specific courses, modules and entire programmes

Example: QF work at the Faculty of Humanities

Profile and targets of competences for programmes

Overall profile of competencesGeneral, brief and aimed at relatively ”unknowingly” readers

A summary of competence targets in a labour market perspective

Competence targetsDescription of the academic competences acquired

Relies on competence targets from courses and modulesShould reflect on the courses reciprocal interconnectedness

Targets of the programme

Working process:

• Formulation of overall objectives for the programme

• Formulation of partial objectives for concrete elements of the programme

• Formulation of content, forms of teaching and exams on the basis of partial objectives

- What’s the content of the course?

- What forms of teaching are being used?

- What forms of exams are being used?

• How do the three points correspond with the partial objectives?

Example: QF work at the Faculty of Humanities

What have we learned? - National QF and actual & local QF

Agreement (useful):

• Active descriptions

• General targets and sub targets

• Use of targets and profile

• Intention of targeted communication to various groups

Incongruity (less useful):

• Rather artificial division of intellectual, academic and practical competences:

• All competences are practical

• All competences are relevant to the labour market

• Academic competence is what intellectual competences amounts to at the level of the programme

• It’s a large and very fundamental process to change the academic focus from curricula to competences – what actually can the student do after completion?

• The process in itself is a learning process – for boards of studies, faculty, students and the university

• There is no right way to go about this process – it really depends on:• Former experiences with similar initiatives• Who you are and which academic identity that you posses• What group of people that you’ll be working with

What have we learned? - I

• It’s difficult to produce a common Qualification Framework that covers all programmes in one. The process is iterative and the overall Danish QF has been a productive point of exit, but it must be adapted to meet the academic needs (important to make sure that everyone involved feels that value is added).

• Further it should be revised on a regular basis as more experience is accumulated by the universities in the interaction with candidates, labour market and outside world.

• EUA/TREND IV report: Student involvement in QF – positive feedback from students

What have we learned? - II