Among the thirty-five countries210 that participate in the EQF, twenty-two have already related
their national qualification levels to the EQF, six countries are planning to follow them by the end of 2014 and three by the end of 2015 (Table 3.7.1). By the end of 2015, it is foreseen that thirty-one countries will have referenced to the EQF. More than half of the twenty-two countries that have already referenced the EQF have also self-certified to the QF EHEA in a single process relating their qualifications levels to both the EQF and the QF EHEA211.
There are important subsequent steps required to make the EQF function in practice. Once EQF levels are being indicated in new certificates and diplomas it would be reasonable to expect that it becomes more concrete and tangible for citizens as a useful point of reference. This change is however not realised overnight. It is, for instance, revealing that amongst the six countries that have started to indicate EQF levels in new certificates and diplomas, there are both countries with some of the highest awareness of the EQF (28% in CZ and 29% in MT) and the lowest awareness (LT 12%).
Table 3.7.1 Status of the implementation of the EQF
National Qualification Frameworks referenced to the EQF? Countries
Completed Twenty-two countries: AT, BE nl, BE fr, BG, CZ, DE, DK, EE, FR, HR, IE, IT, LT, LU, LV, MT, NL, PL, PT, SI, UK + IS, NO
To be completed by end 2014 Six countries: CY, EL, ES, HU, RO +ME
To be completed in 2015 Three countries: FI, SK, SE
Implementation of EQF in documents and national qualifications
databases Countries
EQF level in new certificates, diplomas Six countries: CZ, DE, DK, LT, MT, PT EQF level in Europass supplements: Certificate Supplements (cs)
and Diploma Supplements (ds) Eight countries: CZ (cs), DE (ds), DK (cs, ds), EE (ds), FR (cs), IE (ds, cs), LT (ds), MT (ds) EQF level in national qualifications databases Six countries: CZ, DE, DK, FR, LT, UK
Source: Information provided to DG EAC by the EQF Advisory Group. Note: Status as of early October 2014.
As documented in Section 2.3, the OECD’s Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) has shown that, in the seventeen participating Member States, people having acquired European qualifications that are related to the same level of the EQF do not necessarily demonstrate the level of key basic competences that their qualifications suggest. For example, the learning outcomes on literacy and numeracy of adults with an upper secondary qualification are in some countries higher than those of adults with tertiary qualifications (i.e. higher EQF level) in certain other countries, even if referencing to the EQF does not show this difference.
While the current learning outcomes descriptors of the EQF can be a good basis to generate trust, the above highlights a need to gain further understanding of the desired learning outcomes of individual qualifications and to achieve a common understanding of quality that is transparent across sectors of education and across countries. The evaluation of the implementation of EQAVET points to such a challenge when highlighting a need for a closer relationship between the quality assurance mechanisms and qualification frameworks at national and European levels212.
210 28 Member States, 5 candidate countries, LI and NO.
211 See also page 45-46 of the 2012 Bologna Process Implementation Report at:
http://www.ehea.info/Uploads/(1)/Bologna%20Process%20Implementation%20Report.pdf.
November 2014 | 83
EU tools
need to
adapt to
new forms
of learning
The recognition of non-formal and informal learning
The Council Recommendation on the validation of non-formal and informal learning213 invites
Member States to have in place, by 2018, arrangements for such validation and to allow citizens to obtain qualifications on the basis of validated learning outcomes. Since the adoption of the Recommendation, there has been progress, with some countries confirming their already strong performance and several others advancing with a steady pace. There are also cases in which further efforts and a stronger commitment at national level are needed. In particular, there is a challenge of moving from policy to practice and to increase the awareness around possibilities and benefits of validation. The state-of-play of validation practices in Europe will continue to be mapped through regular reviews and updates of the European Inventory on validation of non-
formal and informal learning214, in cooperation with the Member States.
Validation can also support the assessment and certification of competences acquired through digital learning, including through open educational resources, such as massive open online courses (MOOCs). The growing importance of online learning highlights the potential this form of learning has for increasing access to education. Individuals profiting from the growing opportunities of online learning should be given the possibilities of having the competences acquired through such learning fully recognised. In order to do so, it is important that EU tools for transparency and recognition are adjusted to adapt to this changing landscape of forms of learning.
Key findings and policy relevance
Education throughout an individual's life and one's learning mobility should be facilitated by better transparency and recognition of learning outcomes. Only by making learning outcomes of students and adults easily understood and quickly recognised can they be effectively used for employability or continued learning. However, the existing European tools and initiatives are not fully living up to their potential and awareness-raising remains a priority. At the same time, as PIAAC shows that education attainment levels do not correspond to the same level of learning outcomes across countries, there is a need to gain further understanding of the desired learning outcomes of individual qualifications and to achieve a common understanding of quality, transparent across countries.
213 OJ 2012/C 398/01.
214 See: http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/about-cedefop/projects/validation-of-non-formal-and-
84 | November 2014