“creating new opportunities through literacy and recognition of non-formal and informal...

“Creating New Opportunities through Literacy and Recognition of Non-formal and Informal Learning”

Dr. Patrick WerquinProfessor, CNAM, Paris and Independent ConsultantFormerly Senior Economist, OECD (Education)Formerly Programme Specialist, UNESCO (Education)

Agenda

• Main Idea and Background: Literacy, Adult Learning and Recognition of Non-formal and Informal Learning (RNFIL)

• Terms and Concepts: Literacy and Recognition• Rationale: Literacy and RNFIL• Analysis of RNFIL: Cost/Benefit; RNFIL vs.

Training • Applications: Examples from Country Practice• Critical Factors for Sustainability

Dr. Patrick Werquin, Creating Opportunities through Literacy and Recognition, SIAE, Ljubljana, 7 December 2011

Qualifications Systems as a Policy Tool

With Mike Coles (QCA)

For a short summary see:

www.oecd.org/dataoecd/10/2/38500491.pdf


Main Conclusions (in 2007)

• Together with:– Qualifications Frameworks– Credit Transfer Systems– Involvement of all Stakeholders – Information and Guidance–…

• … recognition of non-formal and informal learning is (RNFIL) is a potential mechanism to promote Lifelong Learning

• Therefore: new OECD activity (2007-2009)Dr. Patrick Werquin, Creating Opportunities through Literacy and Recognition, SIAE, Ljubljana, 7 December 2011

Adult Learning


Adult Learning: Main Lessons


- General under provision

- Motivation (of adults) is the main issue

Enrolment in Educational Institutionsby Age Group


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

5- 14 15- 19 20- 29 30- 39 40 and

over

Finland

France

Germany

Italy

Japan

Spain

Sweden

United Kingdom

United States

Country mean

Adult Literacy: IALS, ALL, (PIAAC)°


Adult Literacy: What is it?


- Real competencies unknown…

-… but there is a need to know them

-We need to know them, in short, for policy action

-Qualification vs. competences

-Initial education and training vs. adult learning



-How skills are acquired and lost? -How policies can shape the process of skill formation, especially in view of the increasing orientation of structural funds towards human capital objectives?-Target groups and individuals most in need not necessarily observable-Technological progress => Communication easy and cheap, innovation, KE-Wider benefits (social inclusion, citizenships issues)



- Not a basic threshold of reading ability.

-No longer “Can you read?” but “How well do you read?”.



The ability to understand and employ printed information in daily activities, at home, at work and

in the community to achieve one's goals, and to develop one's knowledge and potential.



- Skills that are teachable

- Skills that can be learned

- Skills used to facilitate other activities

- Skills important to learning other new skills

-Skills that are individual attributes that form the

basis of independent action

-In short: foundation skills, needed to learn further



- 3 domains :PROSEDOC(ument)QUANT(itative)

- 20 Countries or Regions.

- 6 years of work (1994-95, 1996 and 1998).



- From 0 to 500 in the 3 domains (PROSE, DOC and QUANT)

- Scores have been grouped so as to show different skills in different levels of proficiency.

- 5 Levels:-Level 1: 0 and 225-Level 2: 226 and 275-Level 3: 276 and 325-Level 4: 326 and 375-Level 5: 376 and 500

The 5 Levels in Detail


Level 1 indicates persons with very poor skills, where the individual may, for example, be unable to determine the correct amount of medicine to give a child from information printed on the package.Level 2 respondents can deal only with material that is simple, clearly laid out, and in which the tasks involved are not too complex. It denotes a weak level of skill, but more hidden than Level 1. It identifies people who can read, but test poorly. They may have developed coping skills to manage everyday literacy demands, but their low level of proficiency makes it difficult for them to face novel demands, such as learning new job skills.Level 3 is considered a suitable minimum for coping with the demands of everyday life and work in a complex, advanced society. It denotes roughly the skill level required for successful secondary school completion and college entry. Like higher levels, it requires the ability to integrate several sources of information and solve more complex problems.Levels 4 and 5 describe respondents who demonstrate command of higher-order information processing skills.

The 5 Levels in Short


Levels 1 and 2: Represent a shortfall relative to the desirable minimum.

Level 3: Minimum suitable (everyday life, workplace, modern society)

Levels 4 and 5: Good handling and processing of information

Distribution of Literacy

US

DNK

SWE

US

CAN

Patrick Werquin, International Conference CERI-OECD, Evidence from the IALS, Paris, 13 February 2008

Distribution of Literacy



-Who is at Prose Level 1:-Low Ed. Attainment -With vocational preparation

-Rather feminine - Rather old - More often single

-Low income - Also at Document Level 1

-Do NOT go to library or concert

-More often born abroad

-Deny having issues with literacy

Adult Literacy: Main Lessons


- Large proportion of individuals with a low level of literacy (Best=Sweden: 25% at level 1)

- Low level people deny the issue

- The “mismatch”:

Among Adults

Low Literacy High Literacy

Low educational attainment

High educational attainment

40%

40%10%

10%

Adult Literacy: the Mismatch


Among Adults

Low Literacy High Literacy

Low educational attainment

High educational attainment

40%

40%10%

10%

Adult Literacy: the Mismatch

There are self-learners Dr. Patrick Werquin, Creating Opportunities through Literacy and Recognition, SIAE, Ljubljana, 7 December 2011

Main Idea behind RNFIL

Recognising all learning outcomes, whatever the context

(whether formal, non-formal or informal)


Issues and Questions

• What is it?• How do you measure it?• How do you assess it?• What is recognition?• Who does it?• Does it work?• How much does it cost?


Based on an OECD Activity in…

… 22 countries on the 5 continents:

Australia, Austria, Belgium-Flanders, Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Greece,

Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy,Korea, Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, Slovenia,

South Africa, Spain, Switzerland and the United Kingdom

(Same issues, different responses)

www.oecd.org/edu/recognition


Possible Outcomes of RNFIL

• RNFIL has value in the lifelong learning (LLL) system and in the labour market, e.g:– Exemptions (academic prerequisite)

– Credits (toward a qualification)

– Interim qualification (toward a qualification)

– Partial qualification (some component of a job)

– Full qualification/certification


Terms


• Many terms (in English):

– RPL (Australia, South-Africa, Ireland…), PLAR

(Canada), APL or APEL (UK…)…

– RAS (Recognition of Acquired Skills )

– (Recognition of previous knowledge )

– Recognition of Learning Outcomes

Terms and Concepts•Many terms (English):

– RPL (Australia, South-Africa, Ireland…), PLAR (Canada), APL or APEL (UK…)…

– RAS (Recognition of Acquired Skills) or RAC (Recognition of Acquired Competences): BEL-Flanders

– (Recognition of previous knowledge )– Recognition of Learning Outcomes: EU

•Other languages:– EVC (Flanders, Netherlands…), VAE (France), RANFI

(Mexico), Acreditación and Certificación (Spain)…


Terms (cont’d)


• Other languages:-Anerkennung von non-formalem und informellem lernen (Austria, Germany)

- EVC (Flanders, Netherlands…)

- Validation (VAE, France)

- RANFI (Mexico), Acreditación (Spain)

- Japan (no name!!!)

- Italy (varies by Province)

- Nordic European countries (also varies)

Recognition of What: NFIL•Many definitions of NFIL - Not consensual

•Formal learning:

• Structured in terms of content, scheduling, organisation and financing

•Informal learning:

• Not structured, never intentional

•Non-formal learning:

• Varies a lot (the least consensual ): in between formal and informal, with variations to allow for national/regional/local or sectoral specificities)


Recognition•Recognition too has many meanings

•Keyword: here it’s social recognition : whether outcomes have value and are used in the society, in the labour market typically? (not specific to RNFIL). (As soon as you agree, you have issues because this not happening - Not yet appealing to young people for them to drop out from school)

•Key issue: recognition does not necessarily mean a high level of formalisation, but it needs some (continuum of outputs, from self esteem to qualifications for the labour market). Where quality assurance comes in!!


Definitions: Recommendations•Do not waste time•Better to focus on learning outcomes, as opposed to just learning: it’s easier. A key concept that EQF and RNFIL have in common.•Better to focus on non-formal and informal learning, as opposed to formal learning: it’s more innovative/promising (and not already done)•Better to focus on recognition, as opposed to just non-formal and informal learning: it’s easier because it’s visible(process)•In short: “recognition of non-formal and informal learning outcomes” is what matters•And recognition does not necessarily means “highly formalised”


Rationale (Labour Market and LLL)

• Time and Cost (cheaper, not free, not cheap) • Untapped human capital• Motivation (not starting from scratch)• Demography…• Job matching• Unqualified individuals/workers may have skills• Crisis (assessment a good start before reskilling)• Certificates awarded by vendors>Certification MOE• Employers do it all the time (practical/informal)• In short: a lot has to do with competences, qualifications

and the labour market


Main Rationale

Creating new routes to qualifications!


But why do we need more qualifications?

Rationale: A More Qualified Labour Force!

• Visibility of skills, knowledge and competences

• Skills shortages (availability or… visibility)

• Distribution of qualifications, occupational mobility

• Regulated occupations, and labour markets

• ISO processes (quality)

• Public contracts


Rationale: A Policy Tool• Time and Cost (untapped human capital)

• Motivation (not starting from scratch)

• Demography…

• Employers do it all the time (practical/informal)

• Consistent with qualifications frameworks (outcomes)


Rationale: A Policy Tool


•It’s flexible: continuum of outputs, from self

assessment (portfolio) to full certification

•Job matching

•Training has a cost (RNFIL is cheaper)

•Unqualified individuals/workers may have skills

•Motivator for resuming formal studies

•Crisis (assessment a good start before reskilling)

•Certificates awarded by vendors>Certification MOE

How Does it Work?

Here again, approaches vary a lot. Common patterns:• Information and guidance

• Documentation

• Assessment

• (full) Certification/Qualification (or not)


How Does it Work in Detail?

In detail:• Information and guidance (needs vary a lot)

• Documentation (Portfolio, previous jobs or training periods…)

• Assessment (Portfolio - Simulation, Observation, Written tests, Interview, Panel…)

• (full) Certification/Qualification (or not)


How Does it Work and the labour market?

The labour market is everywhere:• Information and guidance (information or even decisions

often come from employers, colleagues, unions)• Documentation (many documents come from previous

jobs/employers)• Assessment (many methods involve the workplace)

• (full) Certification/Qualification (or not) (mainly useful in the labour market)


RNFIL and NQF/EQF

Creating new routes to qualifications! (Developing existing (formal) routes)

It is NOT about awarding underserved qualifications to everybody (frequently heard comment)


Link between VET/LM and RNFIL

• Visibility of skills, knowledge and competences

• Skills shortages (availability or… visibility)

• Distribution of qualifications

• Regulated occupations

• ISO processes

• Public contracts

• Many of these arguments can also be used for establishing a

qualifications framework


Applications of RNFILType of

ApplicationExemplar Countries

Typical Examples

Second chance school certificate

(Higher Education)

Canada, Mexico,

Norway, Chile, Spain

GED, Bachillerato, adult education referenced to school

system




Typical Examples


(Higher Education)

Canada, Mexico,



system

Entry to higher education

South Africa, UK, Belgium

(Flanders)

Universities working together (CENEVAL), access to higher

education courses




Typical Examples


(Higher Education)

Canada, Mexico,



system

Entry to higher education

South Africa, UK, Belgium

(Flanders)

Universities working together (CENEVAL), access to higher

education courses

Exemptions from formal programmes

(Higher Education)

Hungary, Chile, UK, Belgium

(Flanders)

Modular higher education programmes, with exemptions

available, specific credits. University discretion over

exemptionsDr. Patrick Werquin, Creating Opportunities through Literacy and Recognition, SIAE, Ljubljana, 7 December 2011


ApplicationExemplar Countries Typical Examples

Labour competence certification

Netherlands, Germany, South Africa, Belgium

(Flanders)

Exceptional procedures to allow

those with established

competence to gain existing formal qualification






(Flanders)




VET system redesign

Spain, Mexico, Hungary,

Australia, UK

Creation of RNFIL-friendly qualifications






(Flanders)




VET system redesign

Spain, Mexico, Hungary,

Australia, UK

Creation of RNFIL-friendly qualifications

Discrete applications

Belgium (Flanders),

Hungary, Canada, Greece, Germany

ECDL, language certificates,

professional bodiesDr. Patrick Werquin, Creating Opportunities through Literacy and Recognition, SIAE, Ljubljana, 7 December 2011

Country Practice in Short• Some countries have a legal framework• Some don’t

• Some countries recognise academic knowledge, skills and competences (Portugal)

• Some focus on competences for the labour market

• Some may award full qualifications on the basis of recognition of non-formal and informal learning, many do not

• Some use existing standards (from the world of education), some create specific ones (close to the labour market needs)


Cost-Benefit Model

Cos

t/B

enef

it

Exchange Value of Learning

Benefit (L)

Cost (L)

Benefit (C)

Cost (C)

VL Vc

Main idea: comparing Learning (L) and Certified learning (C)


Recognition vs. Training


Recognition vs. Training (cont’d)


Barriers to RNFIL


• Work on barriers, some clearly psychological:• Legitimacy of NFIL (culture shift)• Credibility (“undeserved” award)• Understanding what it is about (“you will give degrees to everybody”)• Input process unknown (therefore not quality assured)• Many actors and stakeholders are against RNFIL: universities (fear of competition), employers (upward pressure on wages), trade unions (reduced commitment to learning)• Shift from learning to assessment• Ownership of the standards

Critical Factors for Sustainability


• Clear rhetoric

• Clear definitions, clear (mutually exclusive) concepts

• Information, advice and counselling

• Legal framework or social consensus

• Piloting/Evaluation (Data… )

• “Physical” support: [e-]portfolio and the like (ProfilPASS,

Competence passport/card…), certification

• Assessment methods: examinations, simulation,

observation, interview (standards…)



• Financing and fees

• Quality assurance

• Dedicated assessment centre(s)

• Appropriate definition of objectives and expected outcomes: exemptions, credits, full qualification

• Qualification for RNFIL officers/staff/assessors

• Critical mass for opening a recognition process

• “Group” recognition of NFIL (even if fundamentally a concept for an approach by individual)



• Do NOT oversell the concept:• Recognition of NFIL may not be suitable for people without knowledge, skills and competences• Recognition of NFIL will not directly create economic growth• Recognition of NFIL does not create the skills, knowledge and competences it is meant to recognise… even if … it is still a learning process• Recognition of NFIL is not free (not even always cheap, but cheaper than formal learning)• Recognition of NFIL is probably not a universal solution

M e r c i

Questions and comments please to: [email protected]

Read More?• Slander Veronika (with Primoz Hvala Kamenscek, Meta

Slander and Barbara Kuncic), 2007. New OECD Activity on Recognition of non-formal and informal learning, Draft Country Background Report for SLOVENIA. August. www.oecd.org/dataoecd/4/23/41680347.pdf

• Mernagh Edwin, Fred Séchaud and Patrick Werquin, 2008. Recognition of non-formal and informal learning in Slovenia, Country Note prepared for the OECD activity.


http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/4/23/41680347.pdf

Read More?• Werquin P., 2012. “The Missing Link to Connect Education and

Employment: Recognition of Non-formal and Informal Learning Outcomes”, Journal of Education and Work. (forthcoming)

• Charraud AM. and P. Werquin, 2011.The Implementation of a National Qualifications Framework and a Regional Qualifications Framework in ECOWAS Countries, Policy Document prepared for the UNDP, Dakar, Senegal

• Werquin, P. and C. Wihak, 2011. Islands of Good Practice: Recognising Non-formal and Informal Learning, in Harris J. (ed.), “Researching Recognition of Prior Learning”, NIACE, UK.

• Werquin P., 2010. Recognition of Non-formal and Informal Learning: Country Practices, OECD, Paris, February, 65 p., www.oecd.org/dataoecd/22/12/44600408.pdf



Read More?• Werquin Patrick (2010). Recognising Non-formal and

Informal Learning: Outcomes, Policies and Practices, OECD-Publishing, Paris, 91 p.

• Recotillet Isabelle and Patrick Werquin (2009). “The French VAE: Recognition of Non-formal and Informal Learning as a Visa for a Job?”, European Journal of Vocational Training, N° 48, 2009/3. (forthcoming) www.cedefop.europa.eu/etv/projects_networks/EJVT/DEFAULT.asp

• Werquin Patrick (2009): “Recognition of Non-formal and Informal Learning in OECD Countries: an Overview of Some Key Issues.” In: REPORT, No. 3, http://www.report-online.net/english/start/


http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/etv/projects_networks/EJVT/DEFAULT.asp

http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/etv/projects_networks/EJVT/DEFAULT.asp

http://www.report-online.net/english/start/

Read More?• Werquin Patrick (2008). “Recognition of Non-formal and

Informal Learning in OECD Countries: A Very Good Idea in Jeopardy”, Lifelong Learning in Europe, 3 2008, p. 142-149. http://www.lline.fi

• Werquin Patrick (2007). “Moving Mountains: Will Qualifications Systems Promote Lifelong Learning”, European Journal of Education, Vol. 42, No. 4, p. 459–484. http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=0141-8211

• Werquin, Patrick (2007): “Terms, Concepts and Models for Analysing the Value of Recognition Programmes.” www.oecd.org/dataoecd/33/58/41834711.pdf


http://www.lline.fi/

http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=0141-8211


Read More?• Werquin P., 2007. “Moving Mountains: Will Qualifications

Systems Promote Lifelong Learning”, European Journal of Education, Vol. 42, No. 4, p. 459-484. www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=0141-8211

• Coles M. and P. Werquin, 2007. “National Qualifications Systems to Modernise VET Systems”, in: Descy, P. and M. Tessaring (eds.), Fourth report on VET in Europe. Luxembourg.

• OCDE, 2007. “Qualifications for Lifelong Learning”, OECD Policy Brief, March.

• OCDE, 2007. Qualifications Systems: Bridges to Lifelong Learning, OECD Publishing, 282 p.

• Miyamoto K. and P. Werquin, 2006. Participation in Adult Learning – Another Look at the Story the Numbers Tell, Working paper, OECD, Directorate for Education, Paris.


http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=0141-8211

Read More?• OCDE and Statistics Canada, 2005. Learning a Living, OECD

Publishing, Paris, 339 p.• OCDE, 2005. Promoting Adult Learning, OECD Publishing,

Paris, 171 p.• Werquin P., 2005. “Literacy: Words Count”, The OECD

Observer, N° 251, p. 32-34, September.• OCDE, 2003. Beyond Rhetoric: Adult Learning Policies and

Practices, OECD Publishing, Paris, 269 p.• Pont B. and P. Werquin, 2000. “Literacy in a Thousand Words”,

The OECD Observer, N°. 223, p. 49-50, October.• OCDE and Statistics Canada, 2000. Literacy in the Information

Age, OECD Publishing, Paris.


“creating new opportunities through literacy and recognition of non-formal and informal...

Documents

adult literacy

adult learning slide

recognition rationale

patrick werquin professor

new opportunities

lifelong learning

main issue slide

informal learning rnfil