DEWBLAM European Conference Florence, november 30th-december 1st, 2006

1
DEWBLAM European ConferenceFlorence, november
30th-december 1st, 2006
AP(E)L monitor in search of quality standards

• Jean Claude Callens

Coordinator Impetus Expertise Centre Open
Distance Learning
2

• 1. Introduction
• KATHO
• Coordinator Impetus Expertise Centre Open
  Distance Learning
• Two years ago posted to the Association
  KULeuven assignment ?AP(e )L
• with Prof. Joost Lowyck, An Peeters

3
Posted to the Association KULeuven?

• In Flanders there are five associations in which
  different university colleges and a university
  cooperate.
• Associatie KULeuven
• Associatie Universiteit Hogescholen Antwerpen
• Associatie Universiteit Gent
• Associatie Universiteit-Hogescholen Limburg
• Universitaire Associatie Brussel
• The association K.U.Leuven associates 12
  university colleges and the university
  K.U.Leuven.

4
2. Abbreviations and definitions

• EVC
• Prior achieved competences, not ratified by a
  certificate.
• EVK
• Prior achieved qualification (obtained after a
  positive evaluation in formal or non formal
  educational programme).

5
3. Organisation of EVC-EVK in the association
KULeuven
6

• ExerciseAssess the mood of this women

Bron Gilling Brightwell
7

• Implications
• When the assessment is delegated to the
  associated institutions and
• the certificate of competence is recognised in
  each institution of the
• KULeuven then

• All the institutions have to trust the decisions
  so we have to use the same
• quality standards this for
• the procedure
• the instruments
• ?that is why a monitor EVC-EVK has been developped

8
Summary

• EVC
• Prior achieved competences, not
• ratified by a certificate.
• At associations level
• Assessment is delegated to the associated
  institutions
• When positive ? certificate of competence
• Certificate is recognized in each institution
• Student can be exempted from a course, after
  matching with the certificate of competence

• EVK
• Prior achieved qualification
• (obtained after a positive evaluation in
• formal or non formal educational
• programme).
• The assessment takes place at institution level
• Student can be exempted from a course,
  organised in one institution

to use the same quality standards this for the
procedure and instruments ? a monitor EVC-EVK has
been developped
9

• Major question of the monitor EVC-EVK is
• To which quality standards do the used
• procedure and instruments used to assess
• prior acquired competencies in the
• association KULeuven have to correspond?

10
4. Monitor EVC-EVK

• General standards
• -quality
• -approach
• These general standards are used to define
• Quality standards for procedure
• Quality standards for instruments we present
  three instruments
• ?portfolio
• ?criterion-based interview
• ?practical assignment checklist

11
4.1 Monitor EVC-EVK General standards

• The evidence for EVC has to correspond with the
• following general criteria for quality
• Authenticity Is the evidence a proof of the
  performance of the candidate himself?
• Topicality Does the evidence reflect the current
  competence level of the candidate?
• Relevance Is the evidence sufficiently relevant
  to cover training elements?
• Quantity Does the evidence refer to a
  sufficiently long period or is it related to just
  a one-off fact?
• Variation in contexts Does the evidence refer
  to varied contexts?

12

• The six general quality standards for
  approach are
• Transparency Does the procedure give the
  candidate enough information about the
  possibilities and requirements, and is it clear
  how the assessment will take place?
• Accessibility Is the procedure accessible to all
  candidate students without discrimination?
• Feasibility study Is it realistic, attainable to
  implement the procedure and instruments in an
  organisation?
• Privacy Are privacy and personal integrity of
  the applicant respected?
• Justice Are the decisions taken -by all
  concerned persons - considered as fair this
  because of the standardised criteria?
• Reasonableness of period is a decision
  pronounced in a reasonable period, so the
  candidate can take the necessary decisions in
  function of his/her study choice?

13
4.2 Monitor EVC-EVKQuality standards for
procedure

• Phase 1 information and orientation phase
• Phase 2 assessment phase
• Is the candidate being assisted to register his
  competencies?
• Are the assessments carried out by competent
  assessors?
• Is a combination of assessment instruments used?
• Phase 3 appraisal phase
• Do the assessors note their findings apart
  from each other, and do they try to reach a
  consensus afterwards during an assessor
  consultation?
• Phase 4 recognition phase
• Is a proof of competence distributed by a
  positive result of the competence research?
• Phase 5 readjustment phase
• Does the candidate get the opportunity to discuss
  the decision with the assessors, so that it
  becomes clear on which basis the decision was
  taken?
• Can the candidate make a complaint?

14
4.3 Monitor EVC-EVK Quality standards for
instruments we present three instruments

• 4.3.1Portfolio checklist
• Are there clear guidelines that indicate what the
  candidate can put into a portfolio?
• Are directives given so that the candidate can
  make a structured portfolio?
• Are supervisor and assessor separated in the
  portfolio process?
• Does the appraisal of EVC take place by means of
  indicators and a corresponding point scale?
• Does the use of a portfolio motivate the
  candidate to reflect on his own acting?
• Is the candidate responsible for creating his
  portfolio and is this communicated?

15

• 4.3.2 Criterion- based interview checklist
• Is the interview structured and standardised?
• Is the time foreseen in the procedure, sufficient
  to carry out the interview?
• Does the assessment only focus on a limited
  number of competencies (maximum 3)?
• Are there each time 2 assessors who carry out the
  interview?
• Have the assessors been trained sufficiently?
• Does an assessor consultation take place after
  the interview?
• Are the assessors -for assessing profession
  specific competencies- sufficiently familiar with
  the professional field?
• Does interpreting the candidates answers happen
  on the basis of predefined criteria?
• Is an assessment scale used?
• Does the criterion-based interview focus on the
  performed behaviour of the student (example)?
• Do the candidates know before the interview
  starts on which competencies they are assessed?
• Is the methodology used correctly? (e.g. the STAR)

16

• 4.3.3 Practical assignment checklist
• A practical assignment can adopt several
• forms it can concern a group discussion,
• customer simulations or an in-basket.
• This checklist is the same as described by
• the criterion-based interview, as mentioned
• above.

17
5. Discussion

• The introduction of AP(e)L in higher
• education can be seen as an important step
• in the flexibilisation of curricula.
• However, during the implementation of
• AP(e)L in the Association K.U.Leuven
• different colleagues made some remarks.
• We present four of them.

18
5.1 Discussionanalytical view versus holistic
view
Sculpture of Damián Ortega
19
5.2 Discussion Mc Donaldisation of higher
education
20
5.3 Discussion Mercantilisation of higher
education?
21
Assessment en development are like the Laurel
and Hardy of education

• 5.4 Discussion It takes two to tango

22

• 6. QUESTIONS?