A Maltese Qualifications Framework for a knowledge-based economy

The Lisbon Strategy aims at stimulating economic growth in the European Union and provide better jobs and greater social cohesion. Such a strategy cannot be attained unless European systems of education and training respond to innovation energetically and through capacity-building in a cost-effective way. The proposed European Qualifications Framework (EQF) is one step towards meeting common European benchmarks, including those of industry. Will Malta be in the forefront in meeting this challenge?

EUROPE'S target to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion is the challenge of education and training. Two issues encroach on this target: to what extent is a European Qualifications Framework (EQF) conducive to the objectives of the Lisbon Strategy and how important is recognised certification at national and European level?

The proposed European Qualifications Framework has been described by the Commission as a "meta-framework" which will increase transparency, transfer and recognition of qualifications while supporting mutual trust. The request for an EQF was first made in February 2004 and reaffirmed in other EU meetings.1 An EQF has been developed and following consultation with member states will be implemented on a voluntary basis. It will function as a common reference for quality assurance and development in education and training and, as a reference for the development of qualifications at sector level.

All levels within the framework will be based on learning outcomes reflecting competences in terms of knowledge, skills and personal and professional competences. Member States of the EU are encouraged to "set up a single National Framework for Qualifications (NQF) and link this single National Framework to the EQF".

Three major goals

By 2010, EU education ministers agreed to achieve three major goals: to improve the quality and effectiveness of EU education and training systems; to ensure that such systems are accessible to all and to open up education and training to the wider world. The EQF ties in with all of these goals. The EQF also strengthens the Bologna (2000) and the Copenhagen (2002) processes and features prominently in the Berlin (2003), Maastricht (2004) and Bergen (2005) Declarations that outline a European education roadmap in line with the Lisbon goals. It is now up to every member state of the EU to embark at local, regional and national level to achieve the benchmarks set by the Union.

In an EU report entitled Progress towards the Lisbon Objectives in Education and Training (2005), the Commission sets out a number of objectives and major benchmarks related to the need for an agreed European Qualifications Framework that enhances co-operation among nationally agreed qualifications framework (NQF). An agreed NQF/EQF defines clear pathways to learning, competencies and occupational standards and recognises non-formal and informal learning. Such frameworks define skills, promote lifelong learning and the use of ICT and encourage mobility, transferability of certification, bridging vocational education and training with higher education. Many EU states have an agreed NQF; others are in the process of establishing one. The EQF should serve as a useful tool in designing or fine-tuning a NQF.

One of the Commission's set objectives is to improve the quality of teachers and trainers by enhancing the teaching and learning environments. An NQF supports teachers and trainers in their planning and evaluation of teaching material while challenging innovation and change. In this context, an effective NQF ensures clearly agreed learning pathways, quality assurance and recognition and would test cost effectiveness against a person's employability and sector skills development.

The second objective is to develop skills for the knowledge society. An NQF/EQF in which pathways to qualifications are clearly defined, including transferability and accreditation of non-formal and informal learning, will encourage school leavers to remain in education and other learners to return back to formal or/and informal learning contexts.

The EU benchmark is that by 2010, at least 85% of 22-year-olds in the EU should have completed upper-secondary education and that the percentage of low-achieving 15-year-olds in reading literacy in the EU should have decreased by at least 20% compared to the year 2000. This poses a significant challenge to EU member states. Eight EU countries are now achieving completion rates beyond the benchmark of 85% among which the Czech Republic and Slovakia have rates of 90%.2 Also by 2010, an EU average of no more than 10% of early school leavers should be achieved.

Spending on education

A third objective is to make the best use of resources. An established NQF that promotes qualifications through an integrated lifelong learning approach would be an added value to investors knowing quite well that adult learning is accredited in a systematic, recognised and coherent manner. If skills are to be employer driven, the private industry in the EU should put its money where its mouth is, if it aims to compete with the United States or the emerging Chinese economic 'empire'.

Statistics across the EU illustrate that while public expenditure on education as a percentage of GDP increased in 2000-01 from 4.94% to 5.10%, spending slowed down in 2001.3 Significantly, private expenditure on higher education as a percentage of GDP is eight times higher in the US than in the EU and three times higher in Japan. This means that the total expenditure invested per tertiary student is more than twice as high in the US as it is in the EU.

The fourth objective is to promote lifelong learning and in particular adult participation in education. Lifelong learning is at the centre of the EQF. The EU benchmark for 2010 is to attract to learning 12.5% of the adult working age population. In 2004 an average of 9.4% of adults aged 25-64 in the EU25 participated in education and training activities. Sweden, Denmark, Finland and the UK had participation rates of over 20%. It is clear that if Europe aims at becoming a competitive player in the world market economy, it will need a qualifications framework that transforms learners into a flexible and well-trained workforce.4 Knowledge of a nationally recognized qualifications framework is in itself, a benchmark for development and a stimulus for lifelong learning.

The fifth objective is to make learning and qualifications relevant and attractive. An agreed NQF will promote public and professional con-fidence in the integrity and relevance of national awards. An NQF compatible and complementary to EQF is an added value to curtail the rate of school leavers. For instance, in 2004, the EU average rate of school leavers was 15.9%, still very much higher than the European benchmark of 10% in 2010.5

In 2004, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Lithuania, Austria, Poland, Slovakia, Finland, Sweden and Norway accomplished the 10% target. Participation rates in post-compulsory education in the EU25 increased by 2.5% from 2000 to 2002 and reached almost 59% of young people. The participation rate in Belgium, Lithuania, Poland, Finland and Sweden was 65% in 2003. Vocational education can play a most important role in attracting adult learners through non-formal, informal and practical learning. Achievement of qualifications should be attractive and cost-effective to the whole population.6

Another NQF/EQF related objective is to encourage mobility and co-operation among students and teaching staff in the EU as part of a dual process that of internationalising European Education and training systems and of improving teaching and learning in order to foster international cooperation. Mobility across Europe must be considered as a positive indicator of attractiveness of the EU as a destination for academic and research capacity.7

Erasmus scheme

A EQF will further enhance this goal. So far, more than 1.2 million students have taken part in the Erasmus scheme since 1987/88; in 2003-04 more than 18,500 teachers in EU25 benefited from this scheme. Furthermore, the EU is a net receiver of foreign students with more than 60% of its foreign students originating from outside the EU. Mobility of students and teachers supports the dissemination of knowledge throughout Europe while contributing to personal and professional skills and European cohesion.

Parallel to these objectives and benchmarks, the EU has officially pronounced itself in Maastricht (2004) and in Bergen (2005) on an EQF based on three main elements - a set of common reference levels; a range of common references and principles, and a series of instruments.

EQF is based on eight reference levels structure from level one,8 the start of compulsory education or adult education, to level eight, where a qualification is equivalent to a doctoral degree. An EQF will not standardise or harmonise European qualifications but will provide an opportunity to enhance co-operation between education and training institutions and facilitate employability at national and European levels. It will undoubtedly strengthen the "knowledge-based economy".

Linked to this initiative is Europe's strategy to gauge learning through ECVET (Credit System for VET) and ECTS (the European Credit Transfer System), which is already in place in many higher education institutions across the EU 25, including the University of Malta. Both credit systems facilitate mobility of students and trainees within their individual VET/HE pathway and between different national systems.

These systems also encourage and promote individual geographic and professional mobility. In particular, ECVET will also include in its principles and organisation all formal, non-formal and informal training/ education and learning processes supporting personal development and employability. A system of education without a nationally recognised qualifications framework will have negative effects on the process to tackle skills gaps as well as the understanding and recognition of qualifications. Without an NQF, Malta's workforce will also be at a disadvantage when skills and competences are compared to those of other individuals in the EU. The challenge of an NQF/EQF is also to drastically reduce fear of unemployment.

The challenge of transforming Europe into the most dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world has a bigger challenge to overcome. Europe's systems of education require cost-effective and energetic responses from educational planners and advisors to construct a European Education Area that provides access to learning to the widest possible number of individuals.

While retaining individual characteristics of established national systems of education, the target is to design qualifications and certification based on specific occupational and competency standards at every sector level.

These standards would satisfy the traditional principles of European education and the innovative approaches that the market demands. Vocational education and training and higher education are two strategic pillars that can make or break any country's economy. Knowing that there would be no jobs for the unskilled, bridging the two sectors is a long over due political item on an agenda for economic and social development.

Malta will be on the right track in achieving this goal if such an initiative receives effective political support.

Footnotes

1. The request for an EQF was made in February 2004 in the Joint Interim report of the (Education) Council and the Commission on the implementation of the 'education and training 2010' work programme. This request was repeated in the DGVT Meeting in The Hague (October 2004); the EU Education Ministers' Meeting in Maastricht (December 2004); the DGVT Meeting in Luxembourg (April 2005) and the Conference of European Higher Education Ministers in Bergen (May 2005). The issue was further discussed in the EU Informal Meeting for EU Education Minister and the DGVT Meetings in London, July 12-14.

2. In 2004 only 47.6% of students in Malta completed upper secondary education compared to 93.9% in Poland, the highest figure in EU countries (from the Commission Staff Working Paper Progress Towards the Lisbon Objectives in Education and Training, 2005 Report.)

3. In 2002 Malta's public expenditure on education as a percentage of GDP was 4.54% compared to Denmark's 8.51%, the highest in the EU. A focus in the Chalmers Report (Malta, 2005) is the need to rationalise resources in education and to avoid duplication of efforts.

4. In many cases the Nordic countries can be considered as models showing excellent results in social inclusion and high average educational performance levels. The Folk High Schools in Scandinavian countries have been instrumental in strengthening this positive trend.

5. This could be encouraged by a clear qualifications framework which indicates pathways to learning and certification at European levels. Unfortunately Malta has one of the lowest participation rates in education (15-24 years) at 37.8% compared to 68.3% in Finland, the highest in EU25.

6. Making learning attractive and relevant also implies that access to certification is standardised and directly related to the objectives of the training provider. A case in point is access to Matsec programmes of studies where different training providers offer dissimilar entry requirements.

7. The Bologna and the Copenhagen processes have greatly influenced this process of mobility and it is expected that such processes will intensify the free movement of people and knowledge across all member states once the EQF is endorsed by all EU countries. In 2003-04, Malta sent 119 Erasmus and 83 Leonardo da Vinci students and received 236 Erasmus students; similarly Malta has sent 34 and received 67 teachers.

8. The full text of the proposed EQF can be found in documents related to the Maastricht (2004) and Bergen (2005) conferences and in http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/education_culture