EPA was invited to contribute on the parents’ view on the
topic of learning outcomes in a great 2-day event organised at the headquarters
of CEDEFOP, in Thessaloniki, Greece
at the end of September.
The event was exploring the ways learning outcomes
approaches are applied in initial vocational education and training (IVET)
throughout Europe. It was to be the first in a series of events that aim to
open up for a continuous process of sharing and learning in this area. The PLF
will focus on the following questions:
-
How are learning outcomes expectations defined
and articulated?
-
What is the content and profile of intended
learning outcomes?
-
Who are involved in the definition and articulation
of learning outcomes?
-
Why has a particular approach been chosen and to
what extent is this embedded in particular education and/or employment
policies?
The forum gathered experts and other stakeholders including
Social Partners directly involved in the definition, writing and review of
learning outcomes for VET. This ‘hands-on approach’ was suitable for an
informed exchange of experiences potentially adding substantial value to
existing national policies and practices.
In the event it was agreed on that different
interpretations, eg. that of competences, are fine as long as they can be
assessed and translated by the means of a common reference point, like the EQF
that is most widely used today. There was substantial discussion on a topic
reaching far beyond VET, namely if it is really necessary to differentiate
between knowledge, skills and competences, or they should only be referenced as
learning outcomes. While the participants agreed that it is vital to introduce a
standardised format of writing learning outcomes for mutual understanding and
recognition, it is a long-term and difficult task. Time and support, eg. that
of CEDEFOP to achieve this. Fears of losing some local colours are also to be
considered and eliminated.
There was agreement that learning outcomes should be
addressed to different audiences, learners, educators, assessors, employers and
parents among them, and they should be formulated in a way that deconstructs the
barriers of technical language.
On the issue of levels and complexity the participants
agreed that enough information on levels of proficiency is beneficial for the
learners and their parents, it is also important to provide support for better
alignment with assessment criteria, but it should be built with caution and
guidance. The principle of KISS (‘keep it short and sweet’ or according to the
original US Navy version ‘keep it simple, stupid’) is to be kept in mind when
writing learning outcomes, meaning that they should not be too specific or
detailed, while assessment criteria should. It should be described what the
learner needs to know to be qualified. It should also allow adaptability to
technological changes without having to rewrite them every time. It is also
very important that it should be adaptable to local context and it should not
be restricted to formal education.
We have learnt that in Poland they had started a new
programme on the validation of learning done informally and non-formally. They
are called ‘free market qualifications’. The responsible Polish people have
expressed their interest to go into a strategic partnership on this with EPA,
probably next year. (We hope the change of government will not have an effect
on this will.)
You can read all background documents and the outcomes of
the event following this link
No comments:
Post a Comment