Search results

We analyze the relationship between initial vocational education and training (VET) and training policies by looking at the ways and extent to which different approaches foster the acquisition of general and transferable skills. The factors that particularly affect the investment in training and the investment in transferable skills are analyzed both from the point of view of the individual and the employer. We argue that with the reform of their national training systems, Spain and the United Kingdom have followed different routes in order to foster precisely an increase in the investment on transferable skills. Those pathways differ in the extent to which policy strategies have aimed at reducing either individual worker or firms’ constraints to receive or invest in transferable training, and in the extent to which the emphasis for certification focused on “demonstrated learning outcomes” as opposed to “particular learning processes or places.” The paper concludes with the presentation of some policy implications.

Education to an international standard that can provide successful careers has arguably been the main drive of many parents to allocate scarce financial resources to the education of their progenies. Competition for high-calibre degrees has seen an explosion of opportunity in the private education sector. As many Global South countries do not have the equivalent control of standards provided in the United Kingdom (UK) by the Quality Assurance Agency, this can lead to dissatisfaction with the qualifications received in the Global South. This chapter aims to explore the factors influencing participation in higher education in the Global North versus the Global South, particularly where these relate to or vary by locality, and the relative influence these have on the propensity of the learners living in these areas to progress into higher education in local universities. The conceptual framework and methodology provided in this chapter show the differences between transnational education (TNE) as primarily a standalone or independent activity supported by a UK higher education institution (HEI)/provider versus being a collaborative effort between a UK host university and a South/Southeast Asian HEI university partner. The methodology provides a strategy for UK host institutions to best provide carefully aligned independent or collaborative partnerships with the partner country regulatory bodies. The chapter concludes with the author’s personal reflections and recommendations based on decades of collaborative and independent university provision of TNE. These reflections are focused on design-based courses in selected South/Southeast Asian HEI partnerships with the College of Architecture and Design at Birmingham City University.

Nowadays, the higher education institutions (HEIs) of Thailand are affiliated by the Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation and other relevant Ministries which connects the state-of-the-art technology/facilities to all academic programmes at HEIs. Thailand has been successful in the growth in access to higher education across the country, but there are many specific requirements to improve the accountability of higher education system in the nation across many decades. This paper provides an introduction of holistic information about Thailand’s higher education system. It then describes an overall picture of developing and managing the quality assurance (QA) of Thai higher education. It also points to the details of criteria, processes, and systems which were adopted into the model of QA such as higher education standards, accreditation process of curriculum, Thailand Qualifications Framework, as well as provides the linkage between national education act, policy and standards, QA, feedback for continuous improvement as the key component of QA in the educational system. Finally, the paper presents the challenges and opportunities in the rapid change of the twenty-first century and globalisation as the main points and crucial factors requiring Thai HEIs to continue improving their quality effectively.

This chapter adds to the volume by providing a first-hand account, discussion, and reflection on our experience of coming in as outside “experts” from Australia to develop courses for universities in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. This chapter provides a comparative analysis of two cases illustrating and discussing cross-cultural collaborations for curriculum development for an Industrial Design (ID) program and an interdisciplinary design program in the Middle East, namely the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). This chapter aims to provide a better understanding of Quality Assurance (QA) processes and the purpose of curriculum development for employability and entrepreneurship in the MENA region. To meet this aim, we describe the planning processes for the development of the new curricula and the evolution of the programs. We reflect on the differences and similarities of QA frameworks, and their interpretation and use by the universities in the KSA, the UAE, and Australia. We compare the processes and outcomes around specialization versus inter- and transdisciplinarity, as well as around employability in traditional industry versus education for entrepreneurship and future jobs. We observed significant differences between the two recipient MENA countries, and between them and Australia. These related to the understanding and foci of the graduate attributes; the understanding and implementation of course development processes; and the responsibility of provision and oversight of QA oversight in each country. In closing the chapter, we share important learnings through our reflections.

Policy instruments are specific policies – policy content, which is associated not just with policy texts, but also with how they are negotiated and practised (Dolowitz & Marsh, 2000; Fimyar, 2008). In the context of Bologna, policy instruments are Bologna action lines (such as the credit system, the study cycles, etc.).

This Chapter explains the development of the Bologna instruments in Ukraine until 2014 through the interaction of the policy continuity and change. In particular, I review how the development of the Bologna instruments in Ukraine was triggered and guided by the Bologna action lines, as well as by the old national higher education policies. I look at the cases of four Bologna instruments. They are the system of credits, the study cycles, the diploma supplement and quality assurance. All of these instruments have been developed through the reconfiguration of the pre-Bologna policies, which were chosen by the Ministry to represent these instruments. Namely, the national module system became the basis for the Bologna system of credits. The pre-Bologna education-qualification and scientific cycles made a foundation for the Bologna study cycles. The old national diploma supplement was a reason for the delay in dealing with the Bologna diploma supplement, given that a diploma supplement existed. The national diploma supplement was taken as the Bologna instrument even though their structure and content differed. Apart from this, the pre-Bologna higher education quality assurance policies started representing the Bologna quality assurance instruments at the outset of the reform in Ukraine.

The examination of these four cases of policy instruments shows that their development began with a mere change of labels for the old policies and proceeded with building up innovations to gradually alter the old national higher education policies.

Vocational Education and Training (VET) prepares citizens to participate in the labour market, but requires continuous development to adapt to the impacts of global trends, to become more attractive and relevant, to support lifelong learning, to encourage creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship, and to become more inclusive. European legislation and structural funds improved VET for people with SEN and/or disabilities, for example in the case of the European qualifications framework (EQF) and the national qualifications frameworks (NQFs). NQFs often lead to the development of a national qualifications catalogue, specifying training standards for all, including people with SEN/disabilities, yet with the challenge to achieve the right balance between the flexibility and the standardisation requirements of programmes and procedures. A recent European Agency project investigated the key aspects of VET programmes for learners with SEN and/or disabilities in 26 European countries and identified success factors that contributed to auspicious VET and transition to employment for learners with SEN and/or disabilities. These factors will finalise this chapter showing, in an inclusive design perspective, that they benefit all learners.

Why evaluate quality in Library and Information Science (LIS) schools? From a historical perspective, quality assurance always has been considered a strategic issue by LIS schools for improvement of the teaching and learning experience and for accountability. Internationalization has added a new role to quality assurance in LIS. In terms of the context of the World Trade Organization General Agreement on Trade in Services (WTO-GATS), LIS is increasingly recognized as part of the knowledge sector. The WTO-GATS has approved a multilateral framework that sets out rules for the conduct of international trade in services, including educational services. The GATS includes both general rules—for example, those related to the transparency of trade-related regulations—and a framework for specific commitments under which countries choose whether, and under what conditions, to allow access to their markets for foreign suppliers. The provisions in the GATS related to trade regulations and ways countries choose to allow access to their markets are relevant to the recognition of international standards or qualifications for professionals. Although not mandatory, international standards are encouraged, both for quality assurance of LIS school offerings in general, and for recognition of a specific LIS school outside its home country. Additionally, in the context of an increasingly internationalized job market, employers need reliable information on how to evaluate specific higher education degrees and assess degrees recognized and granted in their domestic market. The goals are to facilitate the mobility of students and to increase employability. The need to reinforce the comparability of higher education internationally through quality assurance systems is now becoming more pressing.

Like pro-bono service of law and other professional practices, micro-credentialing has become the quasi-charity project of the rapidly commodifying higher education (HE) sector. Produced with minimum waste and expense, qualifications through micro-credentialing economises time spent and optimises efforts. As a result, these bite-size educational offerings are becoming abundant and attractive to both learners and providers. While learners learn on the job or in the job market, providers get an opportunity to package knowledge and skills. Among a plethora of courses with potential overlapping and mismatched competencies, however, a clear pathway to target a career through pastures of micro-credentialing is yet to emerge. If not, it may result in another system of skill poverty and thus alienate the essential autonomy of credential seekers. Autonomy or self-tailoring your own package of micro-credentials (MC) without a proper wayfinding system could be overwhelming, sometimes even counterproductive, if competency management is based on a one-size-fits-all model. Via a local case, this chapter reviews current MC available to capacitate a career using Construction Management (CM) as a point of departure. It aims to develop a wayfinding framework or user-friendly menu for those wanting to craft a career via a micro-credentialing ecosystem. Broadly, it investigates navigating various MC offerings equivalent to undergraduate qualifications needed to become a CM professional recognised by accreditation bodies. In the process, it systematically discourses multiple ontologies of micro-credentialing in links, lapses, overlaps, and intersections among competencies to untangle complexities and optimise opportunities. It was hoped that learners could target a career instead of matching a job profile in the micro-credentialing universe.

This chapter employs the shared leadership model in exploring how leaders of higher education institutions (HEIs) can partner with Public Policy Groups (PPGs) within the Global South, a region characterized by complex challenges such as underdeveloped economies, corrupt leadership, limited financial and human resources, and political instability in some cases. The driving forces for collaboration include interconnected national policies, shared goals, responsibility, and accountability for resources. The Zambian Higher Education Policy (HE policy) draws on national, regional, and global aspirations for education and skills development, making it a suitable tool for advancing a common agenda for social, economic, and environmental sustainability. HEIs can use their collective leadership competencies to understand the multidimensional context in which they must exercise their varied roles. HEIs require relational and dynamic processes, practices, and narratives to negotiate the ups and downs of the complex terrain for sustainable development and drive a more transformative and complementary agenda for change.