Shaping the global agenda on qualifications frameworks

Qualifications frameworks (QFs) are political instruments that are supposed to facilitate the learning outcomes orientation and the validation of prior learning. They structure and describe the relationships between different types of qualifications and are expected to promote transparency and mobility between industrial sectors and educational pathways. At present, about 140 countries worldwide and across all continents are either considering, (further) developing or implementing QFs. This contribution focuses on the key characteristics and effects of both national QFs and transnational QFs on four continents (Africa, Asia, Europa, and Oceania). The research question is whether and if so, in which ways qualifications frameworks can meet the expectations that have emerged from its development under economic and political terms. The objective of the contribution is to clarify the ‘underlying philosophies' of QFs, to review previous experiences with implementing QFs, and to identify their (anticipated) impact on education and training systems. The global development of QFs is seen as a paradigmatic case of the international trend towards marketization of education. Two basic assumptions are that:a) QFs' development is based on urgent reform needs and the idea of policy borrowing but often neglecting other countries' experience with implementing these tools.b) QFs are much wanted but little is known from a comparative research perspective about how to provide an evidence-based fundament for evaluating existing QFs and developing new ones. Following the classification of comparative education research developed by Watson (1996), this paper provides a comparative evaluation of the development, strategies and reforms of those countries where QFs have been in place for years as well as it critically reflects on the current proliferation of transnational QFs. Particular emphasis is placed on the logics, expectations, and obstacles that are linked with the implementation of QFs as well as on the question in which ways national and international stakeholders are involved in its development. The contribution is based on a)statistics and research documents provided by national and international organisations (e.g. ILO, OECD), and b) previous research from both national and cross-national perspectives.A key finding is that QFs are seen as a panacea: According to all stakeholders, QFs are hoped and feared to have an immense impact on structural principles and problems of education and training systems. However, there is little evidence that these hopes come true and that QFs can solve some the problems they were developed for (learning outcomes orientation, mobility, transparency etc.). Nevertheless, the findings indicate ways on how to apply softer policy tools and provide approaches which may stimulate mutual learning processes. This refers particularly to the outcome orientation and the validation of prior learning.
ReferencesWatson, K. (1996): Comparative education. In: Gordon, P. (ed.): A guide to educational research. London and Portland, 360397.