Transcript Slide 1

Putting the Framework in place: Positioning,
Naming and Quality Assuring Awards in the
NFQ
Dr Jim Murray
National Qualifications Authority of Ireland
Framework Implementation Network Meeting
21 January 2008
Overview
• Positioning Awards in the NFQ
– Mechanism: Learning outcomes/Programme
Descriptors
– Process: Mapping Programme Descriptors to the
NFQ
• Naming Awards
– Framework principles
• Quality Assurance implications
Positioning Awards in the NFQ 1
•
•
How do we do it?
Simple answer! Simple process!
- Through learning outcomes statements written at the
award/programme level (award/programme descriptors)
and
- Through mapping award/programme descriptors against
either:
• Framework award-type descriptors (for major awards)
– fixed at particular levels, e.g. the Honours Bachelor degree is
always at Level 8
• Level indicators for smaller awards on a ‘best fit’ basis
Positioning Awards in the NFQ 2
•
So there we are, it’s all done and dusted
•
No great difficulties
•
SORTED!!!
Positioning Awards in the NFQ 3
•
Or is it?
•
What is superficially simple in theory is a good deal
more complicated when you get down to doing it in
practice
•
In reality, there are many problematical assumptions
hidden in my formula for successful levelling of awards
Positioning Awards in the NFQ 4
•
The hidden assumptions
– that
descriptors exist for awards/programmes
– that if they exist in some shape or form they are written in
terms which are ‘mappable’ to the NFQ – i.e. in terms of the
NFQ’s 8 sub-strands of knowledge, skill and competence
– that programme designers even consider it necessary or
desirable to write programme descriptors in Framework related
terms – is this institutional policy?
Positioning Awards in the NFQ 5
•
The hidden assumptions (contd.)
– institutional autonomy/institutional branding also comes into the mix
• practice of writing institutional descriptors that do not clearly line up against the
Framework already exists
– use of ‘Dublin Descriptors’ rather than NFQ descriptors as basis for
institutional descriptors
• can obscure mapping to NFQ and hide access, transfer and progression
dimension of the NFQ
– pat formulas also hide the really difficult issue of judging how smaller
awards (even when they have programme descriptors) map to level
• how many outcomes or sub-strands of knowledge, skill and competence should
you have in a smaller award to assign it to a level?
Positioning Awards in the NFQ 6
•
In reality, then, the whole business is not so straightforward after
all
•
For the practitioner, there are a range of technical and
institutional policy matters to be negotiated
•
How should these matters be addressed?
Positioning Awards in the NFQ 8
Core Principles
•
Basic responsibility for programmes/awards resides with providers/awarding bodies
– same bodies need to have their own institutional policies and approaches in relation
to NFQ implementation
•
That said, some elements of what should go into these policies and approaches are
essential/unavoidable:
–Every programme leading to an award in the NFQ should have some form of
high level programme descriptor
–Ideally, for ease of mapping to the NFQ, the descriptor should be expressed in
Framework outcomes terms, i.e., it should use the NFQ’s generic outcomes:
• the 8 sub-strands of knowledge, skill and competence
Positioning Awards in the NFQ 9
•
Once in place, it is possible to reference or map such descriptors to the NFQ’s
award-type descriptors for the major awards and then, automatically, to a level
in the NFQ
•
It is possible, as some universities have done, to have one’s own institutional
descriptors for the major award-types – based on ‘Dublin Descriptors’ of the
Bologna Framework for First, Second and Third Cycle qualifications
(Bachelors, Masters, Doctorate descriptors)
–these map fairly easily to NFQ award-type descriptors as they are closely linked to
each other;
•
Iinstitutional/major award descriptors not much help for positioning smaller
awards:
–the certificates and diplomas that make up the minor, special purpose and
supplemental awards and which are the most troublesome to position in the
Framework
– they require their own programme descriptors that reference NFQ outcomes
Positioning Awards in the NFQ 10
To sum up then,
What is needed is
•
an institutional commitment to NFQ implementation
•
involving a policy or approach to writing programme/awards
descriptors for all programme/awards
•
and that such descriptors are drafted in terms that are compatible
with the NFQ outcome descriptors
Naming Awards 1
Some Principles
•
•
•
•
•
Responsibility for naming awards resides with awarding bodies
Input from providers also important
All awarding bodies have signed up to the National Framework of Qualifications and
its implementation
Fundamental aim of NFQ is to bring coherence and transparency to qualifications
system and to help learners and society at large understand what particular
qualifications mean and represent and how they relate to each other
By signing up to the NFQ, awarding bodies and providers have signaled their
willingness and commitment to bring about this coherence and transparency
– how they name awards is an essential part of this undertaking
– NFQ implementation cannot take place in the fullest sense without participation of
awarding bodies and providers in bringing about a consistent approach to the naming
of awards
Naming Awards 2
Major Awards
On the surface the naming of the major awards is straightforward as they follow from or
grow out of the agreed major award-type titles:
– Higher Certificate; Ordinary Bachelor Degree; Honours Bachelor Degree; Higher
Diploma; Postgraduate Diploma; Masters Degree; Doctorate; Higher Doctorate
hence
Level 6: Higher Certificate in Business Studies
Level 7: (Ordinary) Bachelor of Arts
Level 8: (Honours) Bachelor of Engineering; Higher Diploma (in Computing)
Level 9: Postgraduate Diploma in Education; Master of Science
Level 10: Doctor of Philosophy (PhD); Doctor of Science (DSc)
Naming Awards 3
Major Awards (contd.)
•
Of course, it is never that straightforward!
•
All sorts of issues come into the mix
– Branding
• Seen, for example, in universities reluctance to use the higher certificate award-type
But
•what of those affiliated Colleges of Education who do want to use it?
•And what of the occasional 2 year programme that exists in the university sector that has
level 6 outcomes? What should that be called?
–Perceived status of awards
• Seen, for example, in HETAC sector’s reluctance to include ‘Ordinary’ in Level 7 Degree
titles
• The issue of distinguishing between diplomas that are postgraduate in time as opposed to
postgraduate in level – the Higher Diploma and the Postgraduate Diploma
–Proliferation of Denominated degree titles versus rationalizing of titles around a
small number of generic degree titles
Naming Awards 3
Major Awards (contd.)
•
•
•
•
These are tricky issues
Crucial to remember, however, that the aim of the NFQ is to bring about
coherence, transparency and comparability to the system of qualifications
Thus, all naming practices and conventions should be informed by these
values – as far as possible the major award-type of a particular major award
should be reflected in its title
Where there are particular local customs that are unlikely to change, and are
not instructive in NFQ terms, it is important for awarding bodies and
providers to provide information to learners and other interested parties so that
particular named awards are clearly understood in Framework terms
– information on award-type, level and progression opportunities should be made
available in relation to each award
– in a range of sources including prospectuses, faculty/school publications and on
college/university web pages; diploma supplements
Naming Awards 4
Smaller (Non-Major) Awards
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
With regard to smaller awards, there is an agreed approach between
universities and Qualifications Authority
All minor, special purpose and supplemental awards are to be called
certificates or diplomas
Certificates are those non-major awards with a learning volume of less than 60
ECTS credits
Diplomas are those non-major awards with a learning volume of greater than
60 ECTS – normally, the upper limit should not exceed 120 ECTS credits;
beyond that the award is creeping into major award territory
Certificate and Diploma non-major awards can be made at any level at which a
university makes awards
Different approach being used by other awarding bodies in distinguishing nonmajor certificate and diplomas – done on a NFQ level basis
HETAC now changing its policy – will make certificate and diploma nonmajor awards at all levels apart from Level 6
Quality Assurance Implications
•
Hitherto, NFQ implementation has not featured heavily in Universities’ QA
processes
•
But this is changing: new IUQB/IUA Framework for quality in Universities is
committed to enhancing Framework implementation process through:
– including Framework implementation issues in formal programme approval
processes and unit reviews, particularly the positioning of particular qualifications in
the NFQ ‘with sufficient information provided to allow .. reviewers to understand the
appropriateness of the level and type of the award’ – IUQB/IUA Framework for
Quality, p. 54.
•
IUQB also exploring the possibility of using external examining system to
assess the extent to which learning outcomes are achieved by students in
particular programme
•
Reflects general commitment of Universities to Framework which is also
evident in establishment of this Network
Conclusion
•
We are now reaching the stage where we are getting into ‘serious’
implementation of the NFQ in the universities and associated colleges
•
It is not a simple task – demands cultural change and hard work!
•
If done properly, however, it will make qualifications more meaningful to
learners and society at large
•
Framework Implementation Network offers an opportunity to universities and
colleges to work together to address and solve practical difficulties in such
challenging areas as writing learning outcomes at the programme level,
accurately positioning awards in the NFQ, and naming them in a consistent
and meaningful manner