National Qualifications Framework in Hungary

1
National Qualifications Framework in Hungary

• András Derényi
• Hungarian Credit Office
• Institute for Research and
• Development of Education
• derenyi_at_kreditiroda.hu

Consultation on NQF / Wien, 26.09.2007
2
General background of EQF

• In 2000 the Lisbon European Council concluded
  that increased transparency of qualifications
  should be one of the main components that are
  necessary to adapt education and training systems
  in the Community to the demands of the knowledge
  society.
• One of the tools that may fulfil this aim would
  be the EQF.

3
Objectives of EQF

• creating a common reference framework which
  should serve as a translation device between
  different qualifications systems and their
  levels, either for general and higher education
  or for vocational education and training.
• increasing the transparency, comparability and
  portability of citizens qualifications in
  different Member States.
• to be used as a reference point to assist in
  incorporating of international sectoral
  qualifications into national qualifications
  systems.
• to promote lifelong learning and to increase the
  mobility of workers and learners.

4
Councils recommendations concerning the use of
EQF

• Member States should
• use the EQF as a reference tool to compare the
  qualification levels of different qualification
  systems within LLL perspectives
• relate their national qualification systems to
  EQF by 2010 by referencing their qualification
  levels to the levels of EQF in a transparent
  manner and where appropriate, by developing NQF
  in accordance with national legislation and
  practice.
• (later on this latter was emphasized NQF is the
  appropriate tool for implementing EQF)
• adopt measures, as appropriate, so that
  certificates and diplomas contain clear reference
  via national qualification systems to the
  appropriate EQF level
• use an approach based on learning outcomes when
  defining and describing qualifications, and
  promote the validation of non-formal and informal
  learning

5
Possible national considerations on how to
perform recommended tasks

• Points worth considering based on the level of
  coherence of the national education and training
  system
• a) coherent, advanced system of qualifications
  is available
• (Finland, Norway) their education systems fully
  cover qualifications and extend to life long
  learning, therefore these countries do not really
  need a NQF they consider it carefully, in a
  detached manner. They would work on relating
  their qualification levels to EQF.
• b) NQF has been established covering more
  subsectors of education
• (France, Ireland, Spain, Malta, United Kingdom -
  with separate frameworks in England, Northern
  Ireland, Scotland and Wales). Their intention
  could be to make their system more open and
  effective. They are also working on relating
  their NQF to EQF (see. SCQF and Welsh pilot
  project)

6
National considerations (cont.)

• c) NQF is not available, subsectors are not
  coherent
• Development of a NQF has already been accepted
  widely. Newcomers (Central and East European
  countries) are all planning to develop a NQF.
  Work in some countries is already in progress
  (Flemish Belgium, Czech Republic)
• Further points to be considered on approaches to
  adjust educational system
• c1) subsectors should be harmonized better
• c2) a NQF should be applied
• Decision between point c1) and c2) could mainly
  depend on advancement and effectiveness of
  available intra- and intersectoral policy
  coordination mechanisms. For those countries that
  face challenges in this matter, NQF is rather
  considered as an appropriate tool of coordination
  (some South European and Central European
  countries together with HU among them) instead of
  a new way of regulation.

7
Process of developing a NQF in Hungary

• Short history
• Budapest hosted a conference on the results of
  national consultations on EQF (February, 2006)
• Hungarian Ministry of Education launched a task
  force in order to make a concept paper on
  developing a NQF (April, 2006)
• Concept of developing a NQF was adopted by the
  Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Labour
  (December, 2006)
• Three working groups were set up in order to
  design NQF for Hungary (February, 2007)
• Their tasks
• 1. WG defining levels and descriptors for HuNQF
• 2. WG designing methods and tools that are
  needed to run and maintain HuNQF (regulations,
  institutions building, financing tools)
• 3. WG recommending further developments for
  subsectoral regulations in order to make them
  compatible to HuNQF
• (Final proposal is going to be submitted to the
  Ministry by the end of 2007)
• Meanwhile, action plan and projects of
  implementing NQF have been incorporated in the
  National Development Plan 2007-2013

8
Hungarian background

• In Hungary education subsectors and their
  regulations are diverse, and there are no
  linkages between them because policy coordination
  mechanisms are traditionally weak. Hungary is
  therefore seriously behind with developing a
  coherent system of life long learning.
• Changes in the aims of education and training
  have re-valued the role of outcome oriented tools
  of regulation.
• This entails an increasing responsibility to be
  taken by the state in those subsectors, where
  central input or procedure based regulations are
  traditionally weak (ex. higher education) and
  pushes responsibility towards outcome oriented
  regulations. This seems to be happening in
  Hungary as well.

9
Main objectives and principles of the Hungarian
NQF (recommended by the concept paper)

• Main aim is to strengthen competitiveness and
  social cohesion in Hungary
• NQF therefore should - within the LLL framework
  - support individuals life career planning,
  inform individuals learning decisions, and
  advise users of education and training services
  on qualifications.

10
Objectives of HuNQF

• Development work of a coherent educational
  framework that covers LLL should
• establish links among the educational subsectors
  and their qualifications
• make connections to outcomes of formal,
  non-formal and informal learning
• strengthen adaptability of educational supplies
  to learning needs and expectations
• strengthen conditions of individual and motivated
  learning
• strengthen personal decisions making skills
  concerning learning
• strengthen labour-market and social relevance of
  education services

11
Developing a NQF should serve many other goals

• such as
• developing coherent framework for different
  outcome regulations
• harmonizing and systematizing subsectoral outcome
  based regulations (in the long run)
• informing employers
• strengthening policy coordination within
  educational sector and consultation with social
  partners
• ensuring the comparison of levels of
  qualifications to EQF

12
NQF will coordinate and harmonize (in the long
run)

• the planning of education and training programmes
• quality assurance systems external references
• career planning and advice
• assessment of students achievements
• validation procedures of informal and non-formal
  learning

13
Mechanism of NQF

• We do not want to make big efforts for a little
  step (that is to redefine the different
  subsectors at once, and to integrate their
  diverse regulations)
• but
• we seek a possible solution to applying a soft
  tool the effect of which may start to converge
  our diverse subsectors and their regulations.

14

• First, NQF should lean on the existing (and
  reforming) subsectoral outcome oriented tools of
  regulation.
• Hungarian NQF will not regulate custom
  qualifications of education system, but will have
  influence on subsectoral regulations of
  qualifications with outome oriented approach.
• (Having an approach like this, Hungary seems to
  be unique among Member States.)

15

• Later NQF should gradually have a harmonizing or
  converging effect on subsectoral regulations by
  defining the structure and form of outcome based
  requirements (descriptors in form of competence
  based learning outcomes), and by running specific
  mechanisms and tools (such as periodical
  monitoring and evaluation of qualification
  system(s), quality assurance etc.)
• This decentralized and indirect function of NQF
  may be ensured by a functioning body (something
  similar to a National Council of Qualifications)
  that makes reports on standards of regulations of
  each subsectors and on their correspondence to
  the reference levels of NQF.

16
Levels of HuNQF

• Working groups recommend, that
• HuNQF should follow the level structure of EQF
  that is HuNQF would have 8 levels
• Explanation extended research in the 3 formal
  education subsectors has showed, that outcome
  oriented regulations of each subsector may
  correspond to 8 levels. Smaller problems could be
  solved. NQF could play its internal function in
  policy coordination and intersectoral
  harmonisation with the use of 8 levels. In order
  to fulfil its external role of making clear
  relations to EQF, it is recommended to establish
  as high similarity between the two reference
  tools as possible.

17
Structure of descriptors

• HuNQFs descriptor structure will contain 4
  categories of descriptors (Knowledge, Skills,
  Autonomy and responsibility, Attitudes and views)
  There is still a debate on whether the last two
  elements should appear in separate columns or in
  the same column of the grid.
• Explanation outcome oriented regulations
  defined by competence based learning outcomes are
  quite new ideas in Hungary, where procedure
  oriented, content controlling regulations have
  been functioning for long decades (centuries?).
• More detailed the structure of descriptors, a
  deeper influence the NQF might have on
  subsectors regulations.
• In this sense, NQF plays a role of reference in
  a long-lasting learning process. Therefore, we
  are planning to establish more categories of
  descriptors.

18
Further challenges

• In the Hungarian public education there is only
  one point, where an outcome oriented regulatory
  tool is functioning it is the examination of
  maturity (a kind of G.C.E.) that is taken after
  the 12th year of education. This level may be
  linked to EQF 4.
• There are no outcome based requirements linked
  to the end of primary school (8th year) and at
  the end of general education section in VET.
• Linking lower level of school attainments to EQF
  levels might raise the need of developing and
  introducing summative examinations (ex. basic
  literacy exam) at those levels. However, there
  are no qualifications on those levels.
• Therefore, we should be careful, because NQF
  will surely be a strong retroactive force to
  assessment and certification procedures.

19
Problems and reactions in HE

• Council Recommendations state, that
• EQF is compatible with the framework for the
  European Higher Education Area and cycle
  descriptors agreed by the ministers for higher
  education in 45 European countries at their
  meeting in Bergen in May 2005 within the
  framework of the Bologna Process.
• At first sight, it seems easy to relate first
  short cycle to EQF 5, bachelor degree to EQF 6,
  master degree to EQF 7 and PhD to EQF 8 level.

20

• 3-cycle system was introduced in Hungary by force
  of a new higher education act in 2005
• a new framework and regulation of requirements
  based on Dublin descriptors (and on
  qualifications framework for EHEA) were also
  established.
• Due to the lack of
• such cultural setting of applying outcome
  oriented regulation of studies, and
• deeper knowledge and understanding of planned
  function of NQF, and
• survival of many elements of the former
  regulation,
• a mixed kind of regulation has come into
  existence finally, where old, procedure oriented,
  content controlled elements exist together with
  learning outcomes - with no harmony among them.

21
Survey results

• there is disharmony in the descriptions in the
  three categories of level descriptors (knowledge,
  application of knowledge, attitudes and personal
  abilities)
• The picture looks like qualifications that
  correspond to EQF 6 were missing from the
  Hungarian HE framework.
• learning outcomes of diploma programmes have been
  made by accident. Developers did not pay
  attention to employers needs, did not make
  connections between content of curricula and
  learning outcomes, and did not make proper link
  between LOs of bachelor degrees and input
  conditions of master programmes.
• A massive implementation programme among
  academics, that builds common knowledge-base
  concerning the role of such framework, may draw
  further attention and urge further work of
  revising learning outcomes.
• In this process establishing of NQF with
  coherent descriptors might play a harmonizing
  role.

22
VET and HE sector

• The VET sector made an enormous work in the past
  years by reforming the structure and regulation
  of qualifications that can be obtained in VET.
• A new qualification register has also been
  constructed along with employers and social
  partners.
• By now, there is a large interrelated set of
  basic qualifications, partial qualifications and
  additional qualifications. All have their own
  qualification requirements with training and
  examination standards, descriptors made in the
  form of learning outcomes, and further
  indicators.
• Some qualifications correspond to EQF 5, and a
  few is being planned to correspond to EQF 6. At
  EQF 5, they are the so called higher vocational
  training courses (short programmes in 1st cycle),
  that are run by HE institutions alone or jointly
  to vocational schools.
• By force of law, HEIs should recognize at least
  30 credits (and a max. of 60 credits) of these
  programmes in their bachelor courses in the same
  field of study.

23
HE sector is protected yet

• Currently Act on Higher Education protects HE
  degrees and qualifications and allows for only
  HEIs to offer bachelor degrees (at EQF 6).
• It is an issue of the forthcoming years, whether
  the VET sector, the adult education sector, and
  their service providers will claim the right to
  offer vocational qualifications at level 6 or 7.
  Conflicts and confusion will emerge then.
• For the time being HEIs do not notice any such
  dangers as a possible consequence of establishing
  a NQF.

24

• Thank you for your attention.

András Derényi Hungarian Credit Office Institute
for Research and Development of
Education derenyi_at_kreditiroda.hu