Validation of non formal and informal learning in universities

1
Validation of non formal and informal learning in
universities

• Michel Feutrie
• Milan
• 9/11/2006

2
1 The  state of art  in Europe
3
Two major surveys

• Danielle Collardyn and Jens Bjornavold in 2003
• ECOTEC in 2004 and 2005

4
A classification

• Countries having not yet started real reflections
  and practices on validation
• Countries having defined arrangements and
  procedures or developing initiatives but with no
  real system
• Countries offering opportunities for derogatory
  access, shortening studies and awarding credits
  or units for part of a qualification
• Countries (in reality onr country) awarding
  qualifications on the basis of non formal and
  informal learning

5
A process

• From APL, APEL
• To Validation and recognition
• What changes this implies?
• a common language
• certainly a more focused approach on global
  guarantee and on results

6
Debates

• Which standards and references for validation ?
• Qualifications?  Normal  qualifications or
  specific qualifications?
• Non formal recognitions?
• Individual valorisation?

7

• Global or sectorial approach of validation
  (workplace, voluntary organisations, leisure)?

8

• Learning outcomes ou inputs?
• Which validation process?
• Which tools and methodologies?
• Specialised institutions and staff ?
• Specific competences for these profesionals?

9
2 The French system
10
Three steps

• 1985 validation for access
• 1992 validation for credits
• 2002 validation for qualification

11
1985 Validation for access

• A decree authorising access to all levels of
  higher education on the basis of prior learning
  and/or personal and professional experience
• In 2003, universities examined 19960 application
  forms and gave a positive answer to 14930
• These arrangements are still alive

12
1992 Validation for credits

• A law in 1992 and decrees signed by four
  ministries Education (1993), Higher Education
  (1993) Agriculture (1993) and Youth and Sports
  (1999)
• Allowing to award credits on the basis of
  professional experience
• At least a five years work experience was
  required
• It was not possible for the jury to award a full
  diploma by this way, candidates had to
  participate in at least one module or unit
• This law is replaced by the 2002 law

13
2002 Validation for a qualification

• A law and two decrees (a general one and a
  specific one for HE)
• Which establish a new right for individuals
• They can claim for validation of their
  experience, if they have been in paid, unpaid or
  voluntary employment or activity for at least 3
  years
• Learning and training organisations have to give
  them an answer

14
What has changed in 2002

• Learning and training organisations are allowed
  to award a full qualification (degree, diploma,
  certificate) on the basis of individual
  experience,
• By this way VAE is opening up a new road towards
  qualifications by comparison with schooling,
  apprenticeship, or further education, which no
  longer calls for learning or training

15

• The whole experience of an individual, and not
  only professional/work experience, should be
  taken into account.
• Duration of experience required has been reduced
  from 5 years to 3.

16

• All qualifications are concerned
• state diplomas
• qualifications awarded by accredited
  organisations
• professional certificates/diplomas awarded by
  professional organisations
• These qualifications must be registered in a
  national list (Répertoire National des
  certifications professionnelles) established by a
  new State Commission (Commission Nationale de la
  Certification Professionnelle)

17
The VAE arrangements concerning HE

• The 24th April 2002 decree

18
The jury

• The president of a university or the director of
  a high school nominates the president and members
  of the accreditation jury, taking account of
  their competences
• It must include members from companies or outside
  organisations, competent to assess the
  experiential learning. Members of the company of
  the candidate may not part of the jury

19
Two types of practices at work

• A " weighing" principle experience and modules
  are weighed up
• A " development " principle
• progress is assessed and situated on a
  professional and personal trajectory,
• development prospects are constructed

20

• In the first case, we are more on a recording
  approach, a sort of balance sheet
• In the second, we are on a dynamic approach,
  offering the candidates the opportunity to be
  aware of what they have learnt from their
  experience and to help them to progress, to
  develop themselves

21
The jurys decision

• Two types of decisions
• To award a full qualification
• To award part of a qualification or to define
  what capacities the candidates have to
  demonstrate, and in this case to give them
  recommendations on what complementary elements
  they have to provide to the jury, in order to be
  fully awarded

22
Where are we ?

• Results 2004 16860  dossiers  examined
• 22717 under 1985 decree, 3/4 answers are positive
• 4211 under 2002 decree, 2/3 answers are positive
• Full qualifications are awarded in 40 of cases
• 60 claims for Bachelor level and 40 for Master
  level
• 50 claims are concentrated on 15 universities

23
This requires

• Acceptance by universities management and by
  teaching staff of this new approach
• New organisation of the relationships with adults
  from access to qualification, in pedagogical,
  administrative and financial terms
• New form of provision, offering different ways to
  qualification
• New competences for staff in charge of
  accompagnement

24
Perspectives
25
An approach inbedded in LLL perspective

• Universities have to become LLL organisations
• This means to offer the opportunity for
  individuals to come back to university at
  different periods of their life
• Validation as key element of transition between
  periods