experience networking in the tvet system to improve occupational competencies

eLearning

Papers31www.elearningpapers.eueLearning Papers • ISSN: 1887-1542 • www.elearningpapers.eu

n.º 31 • November 2012

1

In-depth

vocational education and training, networking, learning outcomes, validation, quality

Tags

Author

Manuela BonacciInstitute for the Development of Vocational Training of Workers – ISFOL, [email protected]

Experience Networking in the TVET System to Improve Occupational Competencies

This paper aims at considering the development and strengthening of networks in (T)VET systems as a means of improving employability and mobility of workers, through a system where occupational competences, required by the Labour Market, described in terms of Learning Outcomes that can be assessed and validated in all different con-texts (formal, non formal and informal) developed following quality standards, will be abreast with changes and innovations of the global context requirements, in order to respond to those shortcomings that limit the potential growth of countries with serious implications for the participation in global markets, job growth, economical and social stability.

1. IntroductionIn order to photograph the reality of training systems and read the dynamics and potential evolutions, it is essential to enable an activity of “emerging” and exploitation of various ac-tions and experiences realised in different contexts, to provide the cognitive devices to de-velop more effective policies and incisiveness on a social and territorial level.

To be prepared for the challenges of a knowledge-based society, some emerging require-ments, regarding the implementation of technical mechanism within Vocational Education and Training (VET) and Technical Vocational Education and Training (TVET) systems, are:

• to base training provision and qualifications descriptions on learning outcomes (shift from input to output)

• to steer training provision on occupational competences, required by the Labour Market, towards employability

• to consolidate assessment and validation processes of competences acquired in all different contexts (formal, non-formal, informal)

• to develop quality and accreditation within (Technical) Vocational Education and Training Systems

• to strengthen technical networks to extend participation of stakeholders (representatives of Education, Technical and Vocational Training systems, universities, training centres, social partners, trade unions representatives and enterprises) in the learning process.

These demanding features may possibly turn into shortcomings that could limit the potential growth of countries with serious implications for the participation in global markets, job growth, economical and social stability if they will not be implemented.

In fact the last decade has witnessed an increasing focus, both in research and in the policy debate on VET and TVET, as an instrument for enhancing productivity, competitiveness, and economic growth in a knowledge-based society.

Although the increasing interest in these issues, challenges have only, to a limited extent, been followed by deeper changes in existing practices concerning training and other forms

mailto:m.bonacci%40isfol.it?subject=

eLearning Papers • ISSN: 1887-1542 • www.elearningpapers.eu


2

In-depth

eLearning

Papers31www.elearningpapers.eu

of competence development in workplaces, but not pursued by structural forms of significant modifications.

This paper proposes a conceptual framework that might be used as a point of departure for theoretical and empirical analyses of the role of (T)VET systems in order to provide the opportunity of identifying the factors which contribute to the social, economic, political and cultural change.

In this framework several practices are encouraged such as: the sharing of key concepts (i.e. learning outcomes, qualification, employability, occupational competences) in order to imple-ment a common modelling; the support of core processes such as assessment, validation and recognition in order to guarantee mobility; the development of a quality assurance approach to implement high training standards; the building of network-oriented structures in order to effectively exploit the potential of sharing knowledge and facilitate assessment and validation processes.

The flexibility of this framework aims at improving employabil-ity and mobility of workers through a system where occupation-al competences, required by the Labour market, described in terms of Learning outcomes that can be assessed and validated in all different contexts (formal, non formal and informal) devel-oped following quality standards, will be abreast with changes and innovations of the global context requirements.

The structure of this frame is a technical learning network made up of stakeholders that have the characteristics of being able to guarantee the link with the Labour market requirements. All the participants in the network should work together from the beginning (from the identification of needs) to the end of the process (the issuing a qualification).

A best practice of Experiencing Networking in the (T)VET System to improve occupational competencies in Italy are the so called IFTS (Istruzione e Formazione Tecnica Superiore) – Higher Tech-nical Education and Training pathways.

In this system Technical Education Networks are created in or-der to integrate Higher Education and Training Systems with the objective of developing learning pathways (respond-ing to quality principles) based on minimal standards of competences and relative processes of recognition and validation of working experiences and transfer of credit (or units).

2. Sharing common concepts: Learning Outcomes (LO)

In order to promote a common understanding and thus com-mon modelling, it is important to analyse some key concepts, such as qualification, learning outcomes, competence and skills, to make them operative and, from a technical point of view, recognize and identify uncertainties and difficulties in their un-derstanding and implementation in the national contexts of the Education, VET and TVET systems.

Learning Outcomes have become prominent and central ele-ments for defining and guiding education, training and lifelong learning strategies.

In fact, conceptual, political and practical developments (not only in Europe) are increasingly referring to Learning Outcomes (LO) when setting overall objectives for their education and training systems and when defining and describing qualifica-tions.

Learning Outcomes are defined in terms of the knowledge, skills and competences of what is achieved and assessed in a learning context (formal, non formal and informal).

The idea has features in common with the move from instruc-tional objectives to what the learner will achieve at the end of a learning pathway. This involves a shift from the more traditional approach where instruction is determined primarily in terms of what content is taught (mainly in formal contexts) to a more in-novative approach focused on the results of a learning situation (in all contexts).

In fact, the adoption of the Learning Outcomes concept reflects an important and innovative approach of describing, assessing and validating learning. The attention is no longer on learning inputs typical of the teaching process (contents, length of the learning experience, type of institution), but on learning out-comes, typical of learning processes.

The concept of the Learning Outcomes and outcome-based education is high on today’s Education and Training Systems

Figure 1: Shift from learning input to outcome



3

In-depth

eLearning


programming, actually because there is a great direct impact on how learning is assessed.

In fact, the implementation of Learning Outcomes concept is acquiring more and more value in contributing to modernising both Education and VET systems, mainly because it is becoming a bond between formal, non-formal and informal learning vali-dation and recognition.

Some of the benefits of using the Learning Outcomes approach are as follows:

• Learning Outcomes, if set out appropriately, are easy to compare and transfer. They can be used easily in curriculum planning, in teaching and learning and in assessment and validation processes.

• Learning outcomes are statements usually designed round a framework (of standards, qualifications, etc…).

• The outcomes recognize the authentic interaction and integration in practice of knowledge, skills and competences.

• Learning outcomes represent what is achieved and assessed at the end of a learning process and not only the aspirations (objectives) or what is intended to be achieved.

The fact that the focus has shifted to learning across all contexts it can provide the right opportunities, and motivations to in-crease awareness of individual in their own learning pathways.

Figure 2 illustrates the shift from a traditional approach related to learning achieved mainly in formal contexts to the validation of learning outcomes achieved in all different contexts.

This shift is not as direct or straightforward as expected when implemented into national Education and (T)VET systems. This is often either the result of variations in definitions and under-standing of concepts as well as practice embedded in traditional

and political contexts which can make it more challenging to make the transition.

As a result, the individual dimension becomes the core aspect to pursue in the learning process.

Besides the emphasis on the results of learning rather than in-put will involve a description of qualifications and their associ-ated levels using Learning Outcomes descriptors. In this contest LO are prominent in developing National Qualification Frame-works (NQF).

Within the most recent European documents on EQF1 (The Eu-ropean Qualification Framework) and ECVET2 (The European Credit system for Vocational Education and Training), the impor-tance given to Learning Outcomes and their component parts of knowledge, skills and competences (KSC), requires a completely new consideration.

The implementation of the concept of LO in Europe has had a great incentive within the process of creating a European Quali-fication Framework (EQF) in which a qualification is defined as a: «formal outcome of an assessment and validation process which is obtained when a competent body determines that an individual has achieved learning outcomes to given standards».

The conceptual framework outlined in this definition is struc-tured and complex and can be represented in Figure 3.

1 The Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council

of the 23 April 2008 on the establishment of the European Qualifications

Framework for lifelong learning.

2 The Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council

of the 18 June 2009 on the establishment of a European Credit System for

Vocational Education and Training (ECVET).

Figure 2: The shift to all contexts validation



4

In-depth

eLearning


This innovative feature of qualification induces individuals to be more aware of their learning activities and then to request and obtain validation and recognition of Learning Outcomes ac-quired in non-formal and informal contexts and thus promoting lifelong learning and facilitating the mobility of people within the labour market in a global context.

The focal point of this process is naturally on Learning Out-comes, defined (in the same EU Recommendation) as “state-ments of what a learner knows, understands and is able to do on completion of a learning process. Results are defined in terms of knowledge, skills and competences.”

In this definition Learning Outcomes refer to proven, observed and documented outcomes, not only expected ones, and are the object of assessment and validation processes.

A short analysis of some key concepts related to LO illustrates, from a technical perspective, how these rise up uncertainties and difficulties in their understanding and application across different countries and contexts and therefore poses some questions for the effective implementation of a common under-standing and modelling.

The EU Recommendation divides Learning Outcomes into three different categories: knowledge, skills and competences, and provides a description of them.

From a conceptual point of view, there are some uncertainties surrounding the use of the three components described in the definition of Learning Outcomes: knowledge, skills and compe-tence.

Traditionally the term “qualification” has always been critic among countries, as it means either something a qualified per-son has in order to do a certain job, or something that he/she has because he/she holds a certificate, but often it has more than one meaning and it refers to different outputs.

The definition provided by the Recommendation is clear enough not to ingenerate confusion. According to the Recommenda-tion, “qualifications” are statements (formal outcomes) issued by public and private institutions, authorized by national or lo-cal authorities (competent body) to certify that an individual has achieved specific “results” (learning outcomes) related to specific standards (given stand-ards) and on the basis of a spe-cific assessment system (assess-ment and validation process).

It is important to note that, ac-cording to this definition, the qualification is independent from learning pathways, and can be reached through different training pathways (school, uni-versity, VET and TVET systems, non-formal and informal con-texts).

Figure 3: Key concepts of the definition of Qualification given in the EQF Recommendation

Figure 4: Learning Outcomes definition given in the EQF Recommendation



5

In-depth

eLearning


Among these three definitions, ‘competence’ seems to be a quite complex concept, not only because it is traditionally a cru-cial concept in many systems and countries, but also because in the definition given in the EU Recommendation it includes the previous two categories quoted (knowledge and skills): «competence means the proven ability to use knowledge, skills and personal, social and/or methodological abilities, in work or study situations and in professional and personal development».

But the emphasis in this definition lies on the weight given to the personal and professional sphere, as in all the present Euro-pean process of integration.

The fact that the concept of competence has different mean-ings and many definitions, related to traditional approaches and systems creates many problems in implementing LO into those systems that have a long competence-based tradition.

In this context the interpretation, the understanding and imple-mentation of the LO categories can differ from one country to the other.

Besides, the central position given to Learning Outcomes in the EQF stresses the importance of the adoption of common con-cepts to compare learning on the basis of content and profile and not on methods and paths. This will provide an opportunity to consider the validation of learning achieved in non-formal and informal contexts at the same level as learning achieved in a more formal route.

In fact, apart from different traditions and uses, LOs, from the conceptual point of view, are accepted and they are going to be implemented in many countries, especially in (T)VET systems.

It is important to note that there is not a single or better approach to these key concepts, but many understand-ings that can take into account all the differences and the experiences among countries.

This flexible approach towards LO allows an easier dialogue with the labour market in which labour is described in terms of com-petences required by the labour market without forgetting the complete combination of resources (knowledge, skills/compe-tence and other personal resources) in the referring sector.

In this context it is important to develop a system able to iden-tify, monitor and support these particular elements of compe-tences required by the labour market.

Labour market in a global context increasingly requires high technical/occupational competences, but in the description of the components of labour, all the aspects related to the nature of the individual (competences which have a transversal nature) usually are not taken into account.

These latter are considered fundamental for each individual in a knowledge-based society and provide added value for the la-bour market, employment, social cohesion and active citizen-ship by offering flexibility and adaptability, satisfaction and mo-tivation. This group of competences has been differently named, but they all carry common characteristics such as: adaptability, portability and transferability in the labour market.

It is therefore necessary to include in training provisions the development of both aspects: the labour market and the indi-vidual components.

3. Employability and occupational competences as a must

There are challenges that labour markets have to face in the future and countries have to increase their efforts if they want to meet these challenges and improve employability.

The term “employability” relates to portable competencies and qualifications that enhance an individual’s capacity to make use of the education and training opportunities available in order to secure and retain decent work, to progress within the enterprise and between jobs, and to cope with changing technology and labour market conditions.3

Globalisation, economic integration technological progress and the sectorial changes taking place, will have significant implica-tions for the level of employability of working people and their relative occupational competences needed in the future. These will be reinforced by changes in the way work is organised and jobs are performed (within sectors).

Labour markets play a crucial role in realising the potential goals of globalisation. To realise such goals, it is essential to transfer from declining sectors or occupations to expanding ones.

Economies are experiencing continuing shift in employment away from primary sector (especially agriculture) and tradition-al manufacturing industries. The main growth areas are project-

3 ILO Recommendation No. 195 concerning human resources development,

2004



6

In-depth

eLearning


ed to be in services (tertiary sector) and the digital knowledge economy in general.

Globalisation requires mobility to ensure that workers will not be trapped in jobs which have no future. Policies are needed to ensure sufficient job opportunities as well as employability. Unqualified workers are particularly disadvantaged by globali-sation. Free trade, combined with skill-biased technological progress, tends to reduce the demand for unqualified labour. Improving competences and qualification is strongly needed. Workers with competences required by the labour markets are more mobile across occupations, industries and regions than their counterparts. They face a lower risk of layoff and, when they lose their job, they have a relative good chance of obtain-ing new employment.

This would signify that the growth in demand for many occupa-tions where high-level competences are required (such as man-agement, professional and technical jobs), but also for some jobs where lower-level competences are needed, will continue. In contrast, jobs involving competences traditionally linked to agricultural, craft and clerical sectors will decline in number. There will, probably, be significant expansion in the numbers of jobs for many service workers, also for some elementary occu-pations requiring little or no formal qualification.

Considering the situation, even those occupations where em-ployment levels are projected to fall will remain sources of em-ployment and crucial elements of the economy for many years to come. But of course the nature and requirements of these jobs will not remain unchanged and it is important to under-stand the way in which they are evolving.

These rapid changes in the structure of employment and in the organisation of work are drastically altering the form and the content of jobs.

In order to meet the demand for qualified labour expressed by sectors with high technology and organizational transformation and to maintain high employability, it is necessary to assume the concept of competence considered as both: the connect-ing element with the labour market and the heritage of the in-dividual. This should be the basic articulation of the design of Learning Outcomes in learning/training pathways.

In a global perspective this choice fully correspond to the guide-lines and principles expressed in the innovations and changes involving learning and training systems.

In recent years European projects and pilot actions (mainly within the Leonardo da Vinci Programmes) have promoted transnational exchanges and intense national initiatives on this issue. Through all these actions and despite all the differences that reflect the specific characteristics of different cultural, edu-cation and training systems, methods of defining and describing labour and labour requirements have been defined with similar contents and modes of representation, in different countries. These similarities have facilitated the comparison, translation and / or dialogue among systems and countries, even in those countries where occupational standards4 are not integrated into a national system.

Starting from the representation of the labour market, it is pos-sible to loose some elements in general related to the personal dimension of individuals. In fact, the effort to standardize se-lected components of labour and describe “occupational stand-ards” usually involve a lost, not all the aspects could be repre-sented.

But it is a monitored lost that can be recovered in the descrip-tion of standards of occupational competences which describe (at national, regional ... level) measurable outcomes (a group of competences) an individual is expected to complete in a given occupation.

The classification of competences required is of course filled with a variety of differentiations and adaptations to the distinc-tiveness of different systems, but common and fundamental categories can be traced. Such components can be distinguished into two main categories: the ones more related to the labour market requirements (technical work and its area of compe-tency) and components associated to the individual, considered key competences for employability.

In this sense it is possible to refer to this range of competenc-es as “Occupational Competences” as they help the worker to cope with the new demands of the labour market and facilitate their employability.

4 “occupational standards” refers to statements of the activities and tasks

related to a specific job and to its practice, while “competence standard” refers

to the knowledge, skills and/or competences linked to the practice of a job.

Definitions of CEDEFOP Terminology of European education and training policy

(2008)



7

In-depth

eLearning


The name that better define this group of competencies is “competencies for employability5”, since they are necessary for obtaining employment, remaining in it, and for finding new em-ployment.

Regarding technical competences related to labour market technical needs, it is very important to develop and maintain strong anchorage to the labour contest as they apply directly to job roles or occupations, they cover the key activities undertak-en within that particular occupation under all the circumstances the job holder is likely to encounter.

In particular, technical competences, from the more general to the specific ones, are strictly linked with changes and innovation of global market needs and can be divided into two types: the more stable and the more flexible ones.

It is important to safeguard both of them and monitor the evo-lution of those very flexible. Only a strict link with enterprises can guarantee this constant link with the labour market require-ments. It is important to monitor the evolution of both of them, as technical competences remain a key element of defining qualifications in order to face rapid changes and update their positions in a global context.

An important role in this strict link with the labour market re-quirements is played by a series of stakeholders representative of this dimension, i.e. social partners, trade unions, enterprises and enterprises’ representatives, centres for employability.

Regarding the development of the dimension related to the individual, in recent years a collection of “competencies” have

5 Mertens, Leonard, Labour competence: emergence, analytical frameworks

and institutional models, Montevideo, Cinterfor/ILO, 1999

come to light because they contribute to performance in a large group of oc-cupations, and are portable from one to another. These competences are defined Key Competences6.

There have been many works real-ized on key competences within OECD studies7 and at European level within lifelong learning8 development and also a Recommendation on key com-petences9.

There is no one universal definition of this notion, but there has been many conceptual contributions. It is com-

mon to find references to this concept through the utilisation of attributes such as “generic’, “portable”, “key”, “transversal”, or “essential” . They all carry the idea that these competencies lie at the core of the individual’s capacities, and they enable him to successfully integrate into labour and social life, which is benefi-cial not only for the individual but also for society as a whole. In addition, this set of competencies includes the capacity to continually update knowledge and skills in order to keep abreast of constant and rapid changes. They are closely linked to char-acteristics of a personal and social kind, and they have to do, for example, with skills in communication, the capacity to work in a team, and understanding systems and methodologies of work that involve information and communication technologies (ITC) or the competencies concerned in knowing a second language.

It is important to underline that these competencies make it easier for a worker to adapt to changes in the technologies used and in the organization of work, or to achieve new responsibili-ties which require the acquisition of specific competences.

The OECD Studies on key competencies started in 1997 when member countries launched the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), with the aim of monitoring the ex-

6 The literature about this subject employs different names and conceptual

approximations.

7 D.S. Rychen and L.H. Salganik, Defining and selecting key competencies

(2001) eds.

8 The Commission Communication and the Council Resolution of 27 June

2002 on lifelong learning

9 Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 18

December 2006, on key competences for lifelong learning [Official Journal L

394 of 30.12.2006].

Figure 5: Occupational Competences



8

In-depth

eLearning


tent to which students near the end of compulsory schooling have acquired the knowledge and skills essential for full partici-pation in society.

PISA assessments began with comparing students’ knowledge and skills in the areas of reading, mathematics, science and problem solving. The OECD’s Definition and Selection of Compe-tencies (DeSeCo) Project, provides a framework that can guide the longer-term extension of assessments into new competency domains.

The DeSeCo Project’s conceptual framework for key competen-cies classifies such competencies in three broad categories:

1 – Using tools interactively

1.1: The ability to use language, symbols and text interac-tively

1.2: The ability to use knowledge and information interac-tively

1.3: The ability to use technology interactively

2 – Interacting in Heterogeneous Groups

2.1: The ability to relate well to others

2.2: The ability to cooperate

2.3: The ability to manage and resolve conflicts

3 – Acting Autonomously

3.1: The ability to act within the big picture

3.2: The ability to form and conduct life plans and personal projects

3.3: The ability to assert rights, interests, limits and needs

In this context the European Commission has adopted in 2006 a Recommendation on key competences for lifelong learning reference tool for the Member States to ensure that these key competences are fully integrated into their strategies and infra-structures, particularly in the context of lifelong learning.

The Recommendation is one of the concrete outcomes of the Education and Training 2010 work programme and aims at en-couraging and facilitating national reforms by providing, for the first time at European level, a reference tool on key competenc-es that all citizens should have for a successful life in a knowl-edge society.

The Recommendation calls for Member States to ensure that all young people are given the possibility to develop the package of 8 key competences by the end of initial education and training

and that a specific attention is paid to disadvantaged learners. In order to enable all adults to learn, maintain and update their key competences, the Recommendation calls for comprehen-sive infrastructures and coherent strategies, developed in col-laboration with social partners and other stakeholders.

The Key Competences Framework, prepared by experts from 31 countries and European level stakeholders, will help policy makers, education and training providers, employers and learn-ers themselves in reforming education and training systems to respond to these challenges.

The eight Key competences for lifelong learning in Europe are:

1) communication in the mother tongue;

2) communication in foreign languages;

3) competences in maths, science and technology;

4) digital competence;

5) learning to learn;

6) interpersonal, intercultural and social competences, and civic competence;

7) entrepreneurship;

8) cultural expression.

In synthesis there are many taxonomies and differences of this competency area and this create some problems in sharing common modelling of training provision.

But whatever these competencies are or are classified, it is be-coming increasingly clear that there are certain competencies which are related to the development individuals and easily adapt to the changing demands of the labour market (“adapt-ability”). Other common characteristics of these competences are their strong “portability” (they easily contextualise their content) and “transferability” (they can easily be transferred from one context/system to another).

In most cases, it is noted that these competencies are acquired in work contexts (non formal) or in personal/social situations (informal).

In this conception it is important to steer (within VET and TVET systems) Learning Outcomes (in terms of knowledge, skills and competences) in relation to the occupational competences for lifelong learning and to translate the identified learning and training outputs into practical training and learning pathways. At the same time the development of processes of validation and recognition of non formal and informal learning play a big



9

In-depth

eLearning


role in developing these competencies, thus facilitate mobility and employability of people.

4. Improve mobility through Assessment and Validation processes transparency

The importance of the processes of assessment and validation of Learning Outcomes has assumed particular importance when learning policies shifted their focus from the systems to the in-dividual.

In fact, the concept of validation is closely related to both: the concepts of lifelong learning (in all aspects of life) and the tri-partite division of learning in formal and non formal and infor-mal. Validation will be specifically related to the processes of recognition of the value of non-formal and informal learning, while the certification process i.e. the process of issuing certifi-cates or diplomas, which formally recognise the achievements of an individual, following an assessment procedure (definition given in the Communication of the European Commission 2001) remains strictly linked to formal learning.

In past years, learn-ing processes corre-sponded to explicitly promoted pathways in education and training “official” situations. But the new prospective has changed the focus from training activities to in-dividual activities that will be realized, during the entire life, in other contexts less formalized and institutionalized, but equally important and crucial for the growth and qualification of citizens. The con-cept of lifelong learning is traditionally and originally identified in continuous educational opportunities implemented within Education, (T)VET systems and aimed at training adults (em-ployed or unemployed) and it is now acquiring a broader and complex connotation with the evolution of this issue.

In fact, lifelong learning does not occur only in the Education, VET and TVET systems or in its identifiable networks, but it ex-tends its influence to other systems which become sources and environments of learning.

Currently, at EU level, the lifelong learning approach studies if the relationship between various types of learning would help in the implementation of lifelong learning policies. The issue is that as long as learning, skills and competences acquired out-side formal education and training remain invisible and poorly valued, the ambition of lifelong learning cannot be achieved.

Validation of non-formal and informal learning aims at making visible knowledge and experience, held by an individual, with-out considering the context where the learning originally took place.

Gradually, validation of non-formal and informal learning is be-coming a key aspect of lifelong learning policies. Lifelong learn-ing, it is asserted, requires that Learning Outcomes from differ-ent settings and contexts can be linked together.

In Europe the debate on validation has grown up with the defi-nition elaborated in 2002 by the Commission of the concept of lifelong learning10, defined as all learning activity undertaken throughout life, with the aim of improving knowledge, skills

and competences within a personal, civic, social and/or employ-ment-related perspective.

The Communication of the European Commission (2001) on Lifelong Learning defines validation11 as the process of identify-ing, assessing and recognising a wider range of skills and com-petences which people develop through their lives and in differ-

10 Council Resolution of 27 June 2002 on lifelong learning

11 Colardyn Danielle, Bjornavold Jens, Validation of Formal, Non-Formal and

informal Learning: policy and practices in EU Member States, European Journal

of Education, Vol. 39, No.1, 2004

Figure 6: Validation and learning contexts



10

In-depth

eLearning


The practical implementation of policies on validation of non-formal and informal learning involves very different competent bodies; the relevant range of actors in fact is broader than in the certification process which is more standardized. Stakehold-ers concerned are numerous and diverse: ministries and pub-lic agencies, education and training providers, social partners, Trade Unions, councils and experts.

Usually involved in formal education and training, social part-ners are also involved in the validation process of non-formal and informal learning.

Today the issue of validation is a stable component of the Eu-ropean strategy and above all is an integral part of the “EQF Recommendation”13. This document reaffirms the validity of the results of this long process that has been sustained in 2004 with the paper on “Common European Principles for the identifica-tion and validation of non-formal and informal learning”14. This document also provides some key criteria that Member States are invited to consider on a voluntary basis to enable the pro-cesses of recognition and validation, thereby facilitating the transferability of learning and mobility of workers.

Besides, it is important to note that the validation process of non-formal and informal learning suits more with the existing descriptions of learning (output-oriented) used for T(VET) sys-tems than those used for general and higher education (input-oriented), so more related to the description of labour in de-fined occupational standards (written as competences).

In fact, a successful introduction of validation across Europe very much depends on how standards develop and to which extent they are defined and described through learning outcomes and competences (Cedefop 2007).

It is on the basis of common principles, shared languages and transparent and legible frameworks that EU intends to promote and facilitate the mobility of individuals who may see recog-nized in different contexts/systems/countries:

• their qualifications (even partially);

13 A qualification is the formal outcome of an assessment and validation

process obtained when a competent body determines that an individual has

achieved learning outcomes to given standards

14 The Conclusions of the Council and of the representatives of the

Governments of the Member States meeting within the Council on Common

European Principles for the identification and validation of non-formal and

informal learning (May 2004)

ent contexts, e.g. through education, work and leisure activities. In lifelong and life-wide learning, ‘validation’ is a crucial element to ensure the visibility and to indicate the appropriate value of the learning that took place anywhere and at any time in the life of the individual.

The Cedefop glossary (2008)12, gives the following definition of formal, non-formal and informal learning:

Formal learning consists of learning that occurs in an organised and structured environment (e.g. in an education or training in-stitution or on the job), and is explicitly designed as learning (in terms of objectives, time or resources). Formal learning is intentional from the learner’s point of view. It typically leads to validation and certification.

Non-formal learning consists of learning embedded in planned activities that are not explicitly designated as learning, (in terms of learning objectives, learning time or learning support). Non-formal learning is intentional from the learner’s point of view.

Non-formal learning outcomes may be validated and lead to certification. Non-formal learning is sometimes described as semi-structured learning

Informal learning is defined as learning resulting from daily activities related to work, family, or leisure. It is not organized or structured in terms of objectives, time or learning support. Informal learning may is in most cases, unintentional from the learner’s perspective.

Informal learning outcomes do not usually lead to certification, but may be validated and certified in the framework of recogni-tion of prior learning schemes. Informal learning is also referred to as experiential or incidental/random learning

Note that the definitions of Formal, Non Formal and Informal learning insist on the intention to learn and the structure in which learning takes place. The intention to learn explains the centrality of the learner in the learning process and the struc-ture refers to the context in which learning takes place.

A further feature to be considered in the validation process is the participation and involvement of different bodies in the pro-cess (competent bodies and stakeholders).

12 CEDEFOP (European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training)

Terminology of European education and training policy - Luxemburg – Official

Publications of the European Communities, 2008



11

In-depth

eLearning


• their learning and training pathways (more or less formalized);

• their mobility paths.

In this sense learning and training environments become broad and sharable; working opportunities increase; employability improves and there is less misunderstanding between different systems and countries as they communicate with shared lan-guages of similar items which are readable, recognizable and thus transferable to different frameworks and contexts.

Moreover, in the new European and global context, it is ex-tremely important to overcome some common beliefs typical of education and training systems. One of them regards validation. This latter is only regarded as a formal and necessary duty and not as a real added value for the individual who has completed a learning path (or part of it). It is undervalued the importance of learning outcomes in the validation process and it is under-estimate the weight of a “validated” qualification through an effective and controlled process for people mobility in different working and learning contexts, both European and global.

5. Develop quality and accreditation within Vocational Education and Training Systems

The current education and training systems have been shaped by many and different social, cultural pedagogical, economical end employment factors. The external demand (from govern-ments, learners, labour market…) is increasing. This suggests that the education and training world has lost much of its special status and it is more and more considered like an ordi-nary economic sector. It also implies that schools, universities and training providers are increasingly expected to perform at high level, behave professionally and provide quality services throughout. In the current global competitive environment any inefficiency and lack of flexibility will be penalized by lower eco-nomic growth.

In this context the need to qualify training provision is spreading in all areas, in schools and universities, enterprises and public administration. The purpose is to ensure that the education and training activities can benefit from the best conditions possible and are developed according to the most efficient and effective usage of educational, financial and technical resources.

Especially in countries where a large number of school-age chil-dren leave schools and enter the labour force and apprentice-

ships with low basic competences, the provision of quality and appropriate learning opportunities in the (T)VET system become an essential aspect of a knowledge-based economy.

Traditionally the selectivity of general education has been seen as a sign of quality, while vocational paths are a synonymous of low-quality second-choice prospective, often linked to aca-demic failure.

It is recognized that the interest in quality grew in the education and training world firstly among providers of continuing educa-tion and training (because the awareness was high) as well as, to a lesser extent, in vocationally oriented school, and second-ly in general schools and higher education institutions even if stakeholders and competent bodies policy makers have always been concerned with quality.

This suggests the need for a significant shift of (T)VET systems, from its current emphasis on lower quality learning opportuni-ties, to a contributing role for the development of competenc-es necessary for the employability of citizens in a continuous changing labour market. This approach should be taken into account when programming and designing learning provision.

Besides, the development of Quality Assurance (QA) principles may help to ensure:

0 Relevance to the policy and priorities on Educational and (T)VET systems;

0 Transparency in the learning and training processes;

0 Accountability towards competent bodies, stakeholders and participants in learning/training actions;

0 Reproducibility of good practices.

A system based on quality principles and criteria is an instru-ment of organization and continuous improvement of the sys-tem itself in terms of innovation and competitiveness.

It can be argued that Quality Assurance principles applied to learning and training activities can:

• facilitate the innovation of the system through its precise orientation on quality standards which facilitate the delivery of harmonized outputs, transferable and decontextualized;

• intervene in the educational process as the heart of the difficulty and not just the final output, which means giving a new emphasis on mechanisms and methods of the system, seen as a process where objectives and characteristics of learning processes are defined and achieved;

• adopt a global and systemic vision of the variables, which means in particular to operate at a global level in the



12

In-depth

eLearning


reference system, but also take into account correlations and coherence necessary in relation to other reference systems;

• involve in the process of implementation and Quality Assurance all the stakeholders of the process itself (competent bodies, policy makers, learners, teachers). Note that quality is, by definition, a system of shared rules and as such it involves the participation of all actors.

Quality in training and education is about minimum standards and definitions related to the essence or type of activities. It refers to what should be in certain activities and also relates to how they are prepared, delivered and evaluated.

Moreover it is necessary to consider that adopting quality pro-cedures implies operative and monitoring activities related to all key variables of the process. This means essentially a theo-retical and procedural guide able to operate an in-depth review of the system. All this to ensure the absence of non-conformity at all stages through the understanding, implementation and support of the principles and objectives established.

In this context, training bodies play a major role in the improve-ment of (T)VET system. It is therefore necessary that they give the maximum to guarantee their capacity to provide services with consistent level of high quality standard.

Through the accreditation process, in which quality standards, based on objective parameters, are introduced for those in-volved in the vocational and training system, competent bodies (often funding bodies) are guaranteed for the quality of training provision.

The accreditation of training centres, carried out by competent bodies (Regions in Italy), sets minimum criteria of premises based on logistics and management features, economic status, availability of competences (in active management, administra-tion, teaching, coordination, analysis and design, training needs assessment, guidance), levels of effectiveness and efficiency in previous activities, relations with the social system and local production.

The literature regarding practices where quality principles are implemented in educational and training activities is now ex-tensive. The constant that characterizes all these experiences is the awareness of the innovative potential that this approach can provide to learning processes in terms of the overall effec-tiveness of the system and in adapting to European or global standards.

In this respect, one of the central aims of the European agenda is to make European education and training systems a “world quality reference” by 2010. Pursuing this policy, quality assur-ance is a key element to make European education more com-petitive and more attractive for European citizens and citizens from other countries alike. Beyond that, quality assurance is an instrument to establish synergies between vocational and higher education and to link the Copenhagen and the Bologna process.

Regarding the higher education sector, substantial progress has been made in developing quality assurance since 1999. The communiqués of the ministerial summits in Berlin (2003) and Bergen (2005) were setting landmarks, such as the European Standards and Guidelines and the European Register. The de-velopment of quality assurance in higher education has been essentially based on the work of the different networks co-operating in this field (ENQA, EUA, EURASHE, and ESIB among others), and these networks will also play a key role in further implementing the Bergen goals.

European co-operation on quality assurance in vocational edu-cation and training through the Copenhagen Process was ini-tiated in 2002. A set of common principles and references for quality assurance has been developed and agreed at the Eu-ropean level, e.g. the Common Quality Assurance Framework. Its implementation seems broadly to be reflected as a national priority in many of the Member States. Currently, the quality process in vocational education and training has reached a new developmental stage: the European Network on Quality Assur-ance in Vocational Education and Training (ENQA-VET) was es-tablished by the Commission in June 2005 and was inaugurated at the Dublin Quality Conference in October 2005.

In the European Qualifications Framework Recommendation “common quality assurance framework for the vocational edu-cation and training” (follow-up to the Copenhagen Declaration) and the “development of an agreed set of standards, proce-dures and guidelines for quality assurance” (conjunction with the Bologna process) are considered top priorities for Europe.

At this point most Member States are involved, in varying de-grees in bilateral, multilateral, European and global co-operation on QA and accreditation. These transnational initiatives have similar objectives: identifying comparable criteria and method-ologies and fostering the well-functioning of quality agencies in order to achieve more transparency and, ultimately, the mutual recognition of QA systems and assessments.



13

In-depth

eLearning


In the field of VET, Member States were called on in 2002, in addition to achieving the key objective of “supporting the devel-opment of compatible QA systems respecting diversity across Europe” (cf. Official Journal of the EU 2002), to implement QA systems based primarily on “learning outcomes that will enable qualifications and competencies achieved in vocational educa-tion and training to be compared and that could form the basis of a European currency in Vocational Education and Training qualifications” (cf. European Commission 2003, 24).

In this contest it is important to underline the effective use of quality principles. In fact as stated before, common mecha-nisms and shared concepts make a common modelling easier if based on common given standards, thus encouraging processes of mobility through the adaptability and transfer of qualifica-tions, Learning Outcomes, or even part of them (units).

Moreover, the implementation of quality assurance principles and standards in education and training activities managed by network frames should serve as an assurance to all partners in-volved (competent bodies, stakeholders, authorized/certified bodies …), that the stated aims and objectives of a given activity are adequately defined and will be fully achieved.

It should be noted that the notion of quality is socially, institu-tionally and culturally marked and, therefore, not always under-stood by all partners in the same way, thus a minimum common understanding of what it entails has to be secured.

The issue of quality is a fundamental element for any economic sector, but it is even more important for activities such as train-ing that is characterized as “service of intangible nature”, for which it will contribute to deepening and widening the trans-parency, reproducibility, transferability and innovation of activi-ties.

6. Technical Learning Networks as a response

Networks are emerging as an important mechanism for sustain-able development in complex systems such as, for example, the system of Vocational Education and Training.

Complexity is a characteristic of those systems (human, social, economic, cultural, etc ....) that are not referable to simple com-ponents. Networking is a method that could facilitate connec-tions and could be a response to complex needs that distinguish complex systems.

Complex systems are usually characterized by structures that are interdependent and linked in a reticular line in which it is no more important the single element, but the whole organization.

Specific structural features of complex networks also includes: community structure, reciprocity, power-law degree distribu-tions and high clustering. The effectiveness and efficiency of dif-ferent interrelated systems (between and within), their innova-tion, productivity and satisfaction, hinge on the strength of the relationships of its components.

Considering these peculiarities, in order to build a network sys-tem, you must have a policy based on networks It is possible to achieve changes only if they go along with the relative change of policy. You can not search for cooperation and networking between different actors, in the absence of a policy based itself on a similar logic.

The basic idea is to build policies based on networks where it is not only important to give professional and competent answers to technical problems, but it is more essential to reach participa-tion and shared knowledge.

The development of policies based on networks involves the development of an inter-organizational system based on coop-eration agreements closely interrelated which is the result of a strategic path.

The reference is on networks in which the composing organiza-tions maintain, from a legal point of view, their own autonomy, but at the same time they create a new actor to which they del-egate powers.

The development of this type of network provides the design and development of:

0 a cognitive component: where the exchange of information, knowledge, shared languages and cultures are shared;

0 an organizational element: through the co-shared work and the definition of multipartnerships and projects;

0 a political aspect: through the development of decision-making, deliberations and agreements among competent bodies;

0 a technical component: to be a referring actor of their specialization for learning issues.

In this context, Politics should match with Technics in the sense that the paths of policy development (on training, social and labour fields) should be co-made (instead of being only part of a joint consultation), as policy makers are not able to determine



14

In-depth

eLearning


by themselves the outcome of a political and technical choice, failing the necessary technical expertise. Thus it is necessary to develop dynamic governance actions towards the crea-tion, maintenance and innovation of technical networks with a strong emphasis on their capacity to be operative in the specific technical field. The focus is not in its more technical or political nature, or inherent its construction, but in its shared and par-ticipated character.

Learning networks are composed by different entities in terms of legal, institutional and organizational mission but, despite their diversity of intents, they are characterized by a potential sharing of common objectives and are concretely oriented to be a referring actor of their specialization for learning issues.

As a synthesis, the structure of this frame is a technical learning network made up of stakeholders and competent bodies which should work together from the beginning (from the identifica-tion of needs) to the end of the process of issuing a qualifica-tion.

Objectives of these networks in the Education and (Technical) Vocational Training field are:

• assist the dissemination of trust, information and knowledge, otherwise locked in the logic of specific organizations;

• guarantee the link with the Labour market requirements;

• increase the multiplier effect of shared quality principles;

• facilitate processes of validation (of formal, non formal and informal learning) within and between systems;

• foster the adoption of common principles and practices (learning outcome approach, qualification description, occupational standards, …);

• disseminate a common language which means the “translation” of shared concepts into specific contexts.

For collaboration to be successful in networks, participants in the process have to adopt a shared language, a joint vision and common goals. A systemic approach to use common concepts requires the active participation and genuine collaboration of all stakeholders and there must be congruence between key objec-tives and interventions.

Within VET systems Europe is making an effort in this direction by creating networks of specific matter, for instance on Qualifi-cation (EQF Coordination Points) on ECVET (project networks), on quality assurance (ENQA-VET) and their cooperation is based on common shared principles (qualification descriptors, learn-ing outcomes, …).

7. The Italian IFTS as an example of experiencing networking in the TVET System to improve occupational competencies

A best practice of experiencing networking in the TVET System to improve occupational competencies in Italy is the so called IFTS (Istruzione e Formazione Tecnica Superiore) - Higher Tech-nical Education and Training pathways.

The system of IFTS was founded in 1999 to meet the demand for qualified labour expressed by the sectors with high technologi-cal and organizational transformation with the aim of integrat-ing higher education and training systems.

The characteristics of this peculiar type of Technical Vocational training pathway are:

• integration of Higher Education, Education, Training Systems and Labour Market through the development of Technical Learning Networks;

• integration of quality principles and standards among systems;

• definition of minimal standards of competences described in terms of basic transversal and technical competences (anticipating the concept of Learning Outcomes);

• testing processes of assessment, recognition and validation of experience and of (unit of) credit transfer.

The innovative approach focuses on the need to provide a sound basic education, consistent with the requirements of qualifica-tion of Higher figures in the (Technical) Education and Vocation-al Training system, and based on modular and flexible standards of competences in a system where there is not a frame of na-tional occupational standards.

Regarding IFTS Networks it is important to note that it is manda-tory to have a minimum of four actors for each pathway: a Pub-lic Secondary School Institution; a University; a Training centre and enterprises (or enterprises representatives).

Figure 7: IFTS Network



15

In-depth

eLearning


The system is intended to put into strict relation all the compo-nents and involve all of them from the beginning (the identifi-cation of needs) to the end of the process (the qualification) in order to bring to an end the traditional confinement that each system has towards the activities of the others.

The labour market presence through the participation of enter-prises (or their representatives) assure the right and necessary link with the labour market requirements in terms of qualifica-tions and competences to be taken into account in the develop-ment of learning pathways.

This network is intended to guarantee on one hand high quality standards (assimilated from the more formal systems such as schools and university), on the other the link with the Labour market requirements through enterprises, their representatives and training centres involved in (Technical) Vocational Training.

In this kind of networks high quality standards are guarantee from Schools, Universities and from the accreditation of Train-ing centres.

In this context learners can profit from the competences ex-pressed by all the participants in the Network and training provisions can be planned following criteria coming from the academic system, from the system of schools, from vocational training experts and the experience of enterprises.

The system has then evolved from “temporary” networks cre-ated for the purpose of single projects/pathways (spontaneous and spot aggregations) to the stabilization of those networks, with the creation of more articulated networks, called Training Poles15 (Poli Fomativi).

Training Poles are stable networks regarding a specific sector defined regionally and inter-regionally; they represent the referring point for that specific sector, for that definite system, in a particular Italian Region, at national level.

These networks are more complex and are participated permanently with stakeholders of each specific sector in a particular Italian Region. In fact there are further organizations involved such as research institutions, sectorial associations, trade unions and other public/private bodies.

15 For furter information regarding “Poli Formativi” visit the INDIRE’s Web site

(http://www.bdp.it/ifts/politec/)

In the IFTS system the conception of “standards”, especially standards relating to basic and key competences fully respond to the need to promote integration between the subsystems, to facilitate the dialogue between training and labour, to promote transparency and recognition of certification and qualifications, to promote the flexibility of training paths and their personaliza-tion with a clear attention to individual needs.

The minimum standards of competences identify the common minimal basis of competences to be acquired as a result of a learning process that an individual must demonstrate. It consti-tutes the meeting point between the demand of qualification of the labour system and the construction of a coherent cur-riculum, ensuring wider “employability” of individuals as well as its cultural and professional development, also in relation with previous and / or subsequent cycles of learning.

It was therefore decided to classify the standards of compe-tence into three groups:

It has subsequently adopted a standard of representation through the unit, which consists of a group of competences with an autonomous meaning, self-consistent, recognizable from the workplace as part of specific professional competenc-

Figure 8: Sectorial Training Poles Network

Occupational competencies

Basic competencesthe fundamental resources necessary to a person for access training and work

Transversal Competences or Key Competences

(communicative, relational, problem solving, ...)

Technical / Vocational competences

related to the tasks required by the operative work activities required by working processes referred in the specific professional fields

http://www.bdp.it/ifts/politec/



16

In-depth

eLearning


es and identified (by enterprises and training system) as a result of a learning process.

outcomes linked to a set of knowledge, skills and competences required for a qualification or a unit.

In the IFTS credit system represents the recognition of the value attributed to individual competences and the ability to spend them in training paths either as input or output of the process. Competences assessed and certified as credits are competences acquired by individuals either through structured training paths or through non-formal and informal experiences.

In this sense credits system and its recognition have opened a new perspective (consistent with developments at European level) within which all the reform processes of work and educa-tion and training systems lie.

There is an ongoing reform regarding the whole Higher Tech-nical Education and Training system with the objective of im-proving the Higher Technical Education and Training provision through a re-organisation of IFTS and the development of a new subsystem, called ITS (Higher Technical Institutes), in which the networking aspect is encouraged.

Higher Technical Institutes (ITS) are foundations made up of the following participants:

• a Higher Technical/Vocational Secondary Education Institute;

A unit is defined as “the primary or the smallest part” of a curriculum or a course of education and training and is oriented to learning results. Each unit corresponds to a specific combination of knowledge, skills and competence (descriptors) and may be differently wide, according to the reference system. It corresponds to a particular result in terms of Learning Outcomes at the individual level.

A unit is anchored to a standard of competences which is re-lated to a qualification at regional or national level.

The use of transparent and recog-nized standards on a regional/na-tional basis makes it significantly easier to establish, previously, credits usable in subsequent aca-demic courses, vocational train-ing paths as well as envisage other forms of validation and rec-ognition of experience achieved in different contexts.

The unit is the smallest part of a learning pathways built around the referring standard of com-petences linked to the specific qualification. To each unit it is possible to allocate credits.

Credits do not replace learning outcomes and generally are not the direct translation of them. Credits are allocated to learning

Figure 9: IFTS units of LO

Figure 10: IFTS pathways IFTS pathways



17

In-depth

eLearning


• a training centre accredited for Higher Education by the referring Region;

• an enterprise located in the industrial site of the Higher Technical/Vocational Secondary Education Institute;

• a research department or other body of scientific and technology research;

• a local authority (municipality, province, mountain community, etc.).

The networking aspect of this particular type of training provi-sion could be considered a focal point towards the integration of the following two essential elements:

• requirements of labour market – expressed by enterprises and social partners

• individual needs – recovered and guaranteed by education and training representatives

All these actors have, in these networks, the opportunity to par-ticipate in the development of steady pathways in which learn-ing and training provisions (and the way they are designed) are only part of the innovation, because an important role is played by experiences of recognition and validation (and allocation and transfer of credits) realized in non formal contexts.

8. ConclusionsThese policy issues from a technical point of view are meant as a contribution to the national discussions, analysing experiences from other countries with a local perspective, considering that there are elements which cannot be excluded from future poli-cies on Education and Training especially in (T)VET systems, if countries intend to enhance productivity, competitiveness, and economic growth in a knowledge-based society.

The understanding and deepening of practices and experiences realized in the Italian context of IFTS, can promote the emer-gence of some important elements in the development of best practices or pilot actions.

Among them, could be considered relevant the following re-quirements:

• to focus policy and governance issues on individual needs;

• to link learning and training provisions on Labour Market requirements;

• to establish coherent and objected-oriented networks in the (T)VET system in order to facilitate the participation of stakeholders in the learning process;

• to facilitate mobility of individuals and transferability of qualifications through:

0 transparency of Education and (T)VET systems

0 transparency of National Qualification Frameworks

0 adaptation of national systems to common languages and concepts (qualification, learning outcomes, competences, unit, credit, …)

0 development of assessment and validation processes (in Formal, Non Formal and Informal contexts)

0 recognition and transfer of (unit of) credits

0 development of quality assurance and accreditation of training centres;

• to foster coherence with European innovating processes (EQF, ECVET, validation).

NotesThis paper has been presented as a keynote speech at the Conference on “Quality Assurance and Accreditation of Education and Vocational Training”, Il Cairo - Egypt, June 16, 2010.

This paper is available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/taiex/dyn/taiex-events/library/detail_en.jsp?EventID=34510.

ReferencesAllulli Giorgio, La qualità al centro delle politiche europee, 2010 - http://www.cnos-scuola.it

Bobbio, Luigi; Morisi, Massimo, Reti infrastrutturali, reti decisionali e rappresentanza nell’Unione Europea, Teoria politica, 17(1), 2001, pp. 65-86

Bobbio – La Struttura delle Reti in un Mondo Interconnesso - Mondo Digitale n.4. Dicembre 2006

CEDEFOP, Glossary, in Making Learning Visible, Luxemburg – Official Publications of the European Communities, 2000

CEDEFOP, Terminology of European education and training policy - Luxemburg – Official Publications of the European Communities, 2008

CEDEFOP, The Shift to Learning Outcomes. Conceptual, political and practical developments in Europe. - Luxemburg – Official Publications of the European Communities, 2008

CEDEFOP, Validation of non-formal and informal learning - Luxemburg – Official Publications of the European Communities, 2008.

http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/taiex/dyn/taiex-events/library/detail_en.jsp?EventID=34510

http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/taiex/dyn/taiex-events/library/detail_en.jsp?EventID=34510

http://www.cnos-scuola.it



18

In-depth

eLearning


Pichierri A. (2005), Lo sviluppo locale in Europa. Stato dell’arte e prospettive, Rubettino

QCA, Annual NVQ Statistics. London. www.qca.org.uk

Raven, J., & Stephenson, J. (Eds.). (2001). Competence in the Learning Society. New York: Peter Lang.

Rauner Felix, Practical knowledge and occupational competence. European Journal of vocational training – No 40 – 2007/1 – ISSN 1977-0219

Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of the 23 April 2008 on the establishment of the European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning.

Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of the 18 June 2009 on the establishment of a European Credit System for Vocational Education and Training (ECVET).

Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 18 December 2006, on key competences for lifelong learning [Official Journal L 394 of 30.12.2006].

Rychen, Dominique; Salganic, Laura (Eds). Defining and selecting key competences. Gottingen, Germany: Hogrefe and Huber, 2001

Shippmann, J. S., Ash, R. A., Battista, M., Carr, L., Eyde, L. D., Hesketh, B., Kehoe, J., Pearlman, K., and Sanchez, J. I. (2000). The practice of competency modelling, Personnel Psychology, 53, 703-740.

Vargas Zuñiga, F., Key competencies and lifelong learning, Montevideo: CINTERFOR/ILO, 2005 181 p. (Tools for change, 26)

Copyrights The texts published in this journal, unless otherwise indicated, are subject to a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivativeWorks 3.0 Unported licence. They may be copied, distributed and broadcast pro-vided that the author and the e-journal that publishes them, eLearning Papers, are cited. Commercial use and derivative works are not permitted. The full licence can be consulted on http://creativecommons.org/licens-es/by-nc-nd/3.0/

Edition and productionName of the publication: eLearning Papers ISSN: 1887-1542Publisher: elearningeuropa.infoEdited by: P.A.U. Education, S.L.Postal address: c/Muntaner 262, 3r, 08021 Barcelona (Spain)Phone: +34 933 670 400Email: [email protected]: www.elearningpapers.eu

Colardyn Danielle, Bjornavold Jens, Validation of Formal, Non-Formal and informal Learning: policy and practices in EU Member States, European Journal of Education, Vol. 39, No.1, 2004.

Commission Communication and the Council Resolution of 27 June 2002 on lifelong learning

European Commission Comuniqué, Making a European Area of Lifelong Learning a reality, Brussels, 2001.

Eurydice. Key competences. A developing concept in general compulsory education. Brussels, 2002.

ILO Recommendation No. 195 concerning human resources development, 2004.

ISFOL, Standard delle competenze nell’Istruzione E Formazione Tecnica Superiore. Percorsi metodologici e di sperimentazione, Roma, Isfol, 2006

ISFOL, Verso l’European Qualification Framework. Il sistema europeo dell’apprendimento: trasparenza, mobilità riconoscimento delle qualifiche e delle competenze. Roma, Isfol, 2008

ISFOL, Esperienze di validazione dell’apprendimento non formale e informale in Italia. Roma, Isfol, 2007

Mertens Leonard, Labour competence: emergence, analytical frameworks and institutional models, Montevideo, Cinterfor/ILO, 1999

Newman, M., Barabási, A.-L., Watts, D.J. [eds.] (2006) The Structure and Dynamics of Networks. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

OECD, Knowledge, Skills for life. First results from PISA 2000, Paris, 2001

OECD, Definition and Selection of Competencies (DeSeCo), 2005.

http://www.qca.org.uk

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/

mailto:editorial%40elearningeuropa.info?subject=

http://www.elearningpapers.eu

experience networking in the tvet system to improve occupational competencies

Documents

training tvet systems

training vet

vocational training

reality of training

training centres

imple learning outcomes

occupationlearning outcomes

technical vocational