1-s2.0-S1877042814045686-main

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 7

Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 142 (2014) 176 – 182

CIEA 2014

Models of quality assurance in evaluation and validation of


competencies, for an easier access to higher education
Simona Savaa , Claudia Borcaa, Liliana Danciua
a
West University of Timi oara, 4 Vasile Parvan, 300223, Timi oara, România

Abstract

Validation of competencies is an issue very much debated nowadays at European level as a solution for enlarging access to
higher education. Unfortunately, the Romanian higher education system is still not open to introducing this flexible pathway from
a formal point of view, even though bottom-up practices exist.
The paper presents a content analysis of three models elaborated and operating in Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Nordic
countries, for ensuring quality in the validation practices introduced in their higher education institutions, highlighting possible
ways for transferring such models into the Romanian context.
©
© 2014
2014 Elsevier Ltd. This
The Authors. is an open
Published access article
by Elsevier Ltd. under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the Alexandru Ioan Cuza University.
Peer-review under responsibility of the Alexandru Ioan Cuza University.
Keywords: validation of competencies; models for quality assurance; access to higher education

1. Background: Emphasis on Validation of Competencies

Validation of prior learning (VPL) has been a continuous topic in European policy making on educational and
training since the launch of the Memorandum on Lifelong Learning (European Commission, 2000). The key message
of valuing learning wherever and whenever it takes place, and the related approach of validation of competencies
acquired in all life and learning contexts (formal, non-formal, informal) has become a guiding principle in designing
inclusive and comprehensive educational policies, enjoying therefore a lot of efforts and solutions. In 2004, the
European Council adopted the common European principles on identifying and validating non-formal and informal

Corresponding author. Tel.: +40-256-592-960


E-mail address: ssava@socio.uvt.ro

1877-0428 © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the Alexandru Ioan Cuza University.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.640
Simona Sava et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 142 (2014) 176 – 182 177

learning (Cedefop, 2009). CEDEFOP has played a major role in putting the issue of VPL on the policy agenda, by
enabling the member states to get familiarized with the specificity of VPL and the ways it can be addressed. Not
only has CEDEFOP mapped the state of the art in implementing VPL around Europe (see the Snapshot done in
2007, and published in 2008), but it has also launched in 2009 the European guidelines for validating non formal
and informal learning, guidelines that try to clarify how validation of non-formal and informal learning is (and could
be) linked and aligned to the formal qualifications system (Cedefop, 2009).
The launched instruments Europass, European Qualification Framework - EQF, European Quality assurance
framework, European credit transfer system – ECTS/ ECVET etc. (see CEDEFOP, 2010) have sped up the VPL
process in the national systems of qualifications, by fostering the description of qualifications in terms of learning
outcomes. The “validation is integrated with the credit transfer and accumulation arrangements, as an effort to
broaden the range of knowledge, skills and competences valued in society and to make it easier for individuals to
make progress in learning and work” (Bjørnåvold, Le Mouillour, 2009, p.28).
In 2012, based on the impact assessment of implementing VPL in the member states (European Commission,
2012), the Council Recommendation on the validation of non-formal and informal learning was launched (Council
of Europe, 2012). This Recommendation is convergent with the strategic paper for rethinking education (European
Commission 2012b) till 2020, meant for contributing to the Europe 2020 strategy to create a smart, green,
sustainable, inclusive and high-employment economy in the next decade. Therefore, a special chapter in the studies
for monitoring the progress towards 2020 is covered by the VPL solutions and facts (European Commission, 2013).
Thus, VPL is continuously mentioned as a solution to address the skills matching, the skills demand and supply,
the needed skills for the new jobs. VPL is seen as a solution to empower both the individuals to meet the labour
market needs, and the training systems, to address in the most flexible way the needed skills, the skills gap. “By
making use of the assessment methodologies, qualifications standards formulated in terms of learning outcomes, and
national qualifications frameworks, many education and training institutions, mainly from the Nordic countries,
integrate the credit systems recognition of professional experience as a basis for qualification award… They
recognize that alternative learning forms can result in outcomes equivalent (although not similar) to those of their
own courses, and there is no single route to a qualification, signalling greater tolerance towards non-traditional
learning routes and pathways” (Bjørnåvold & Le Mouillour, 2009).
Such practice represents a new and innovative approach, and not too many education and training institutions of
formal education are open or ready to implement this, even in countries where the VPL system operates. They are
still seen as separate initiatives, with the way they could interact and create synergies being considered less. Such
situation exists unfortunately in Romania also, the debates for the national qualification framework showing the
resistance of higher education institutions towards introducing the VPL practice in a formal way. Such an attitude is
difficult to understand, once the signals for this need, coming from the students and society, are increasing.
“Validation of non-formal and informal learning and NQFs have a common objective: enable individuals to make
progress in their learning careers on the basis of their learning outcomes and competences, not on the basis of the
duration and location of a particular learning programme” (Bjørnåvold & Le Mouillour, 2009, p.42). The decreased
number of students, the increased student drop out, the reduced finances for higher education force higher education
institutions to look for solutions.
VPL is seen as a solution for wider access to higher education, for shortening the studies, and for improving the
retention into higher education institutions (HEI) (European Commission, 2011; European Union, 2013).
The paper will analyse what tools and approaches have been developed and used in three countries already
implementing VPL in higher education, trying to identify the solutions which can be adapted to the Romanian
context as well. The framework models for VPL elaborated and operating in Switzerland, the Netherlands, and
Nordic countries will be analyzed, in an effort to answer two questions:
x Which concept of VPL is followed in their framework model: is their tool designed to be used by the
whole cohort of candidates, or it is responsive to individual candidates’ learning; it is more about
formative or summative VPL, or both?
x Which steps of implementation do they plan or realise already?
We follow these questions first for each country separately and compare the findings in the end, looking for common
ideas and instruments, which might be an impulse for the further transfer in HEI. Not only the descriptive papers will
178 Simona Sava et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 142 (2014) 176 – 182

be followed, but the national reports on their use, as elaborated within the project ALLinHE (Access to Lifelong
Learning in Higher Education for All, 2011-2014; http://www.allinhe.eu/ ) by the national experts.

2. Content analysis of the framework models

2.1. VPL model in Switzerland

Switzerland is a federal state, with the cantons having the autonomy to adapt and implement the regulations
agreed at the federal level as they wish. The “vision” of VPL is quite articulated in Switzerland, as well as
experiences and practices developed in the field since about 20 years ago. A bottom-up approach to VPL (typical of
the first phase) has been integrated during the last decade by general rules, defining a top-down scenario (built up
however with a large participation of actors and stakeholders) as far as summative VPL is concerned (Stiftung
ECAP, 2013). In this sense, considering the Swiss general framework, one must distinguish between recognition
practices (including valuation of learning outcomes) and validation of learning outcomes, leading in Switzerland to
an official qualification. The legal basis for VPL, followed by the general Guidelines for the development of VPL in
any educational sector, was launched in 2002. In Validation VPL is strictly summative, but it coexists with
complementary approaches, in which VPL has different perspectives, such as: a) admission to a cycle of studies on
the basis of a dossier b) exemptions from preparatory training, in order to pass a qualification exam or assessment c)
certification of competences, including key skills, as a component of a qualification.
In 2004 the CH-Q System of Managing Competencies has been developed with the support of the Federal Office
for Professional Education and Technology. It enjoyed relatively little use till 2011, when intensive efforts started to
be put into its wider use and dissemination, together with the Federal Association for Continuing Education (SVEB).
In the expected federal act for continuing education (2014) VPL plays an important part (www.ch-q.ch).
Universities are free to organize themselves as far as admission rules (including valuation of prior learning) are
concerned. A Federal Act aiming at coordinating HE is under discussion. So far VPL is only marginally practiced in
this sector, but a good example is the University of Geneva (http://www.vae-formations.ch/) (Stiftung ECAP, 2013).

2.1.1. VPL concept


The CH-Q System of Managing Competencies from Switzerland (Calonder Gerster, 2004) was designed as “an
overarching concept committed to the individualized development of young people and adults thus enhancing their
job flexibility and mobility” (p. 2). In ten pages (Calonder Gerster, 2004) the concept of the CH-Q system is
explained, covering its origins, basic features, organization/structure, application (for which target groups) including
the CH-Q training and guidance program and the system for certification and awarding of the CH-Q label, together
with the existing structures and the involved stakeholders.
The CH-Q is described as an “Integrated concept for bottom-up process”, allowing all three perspectives of the
VPL process, previously described, according with the individual decision and personal situation.
The CH_Q is designed in a self-administered way, putting full emphasis of the individual’s own potential,
responsibility and self-management of competencies and qualifications, directing towards a realistic deliberation of
his/ her career and personal development.
Oriented toward the individual, the Swiss system tries to capture, in a holistic way, the personal strengths of
individuals, linking “various different areas of life / activity, linking cultural, general and vocational education from
all learning contexts (formal and non-/informal learning), including all types of competencies (technical, methodical,
social, self-competencies)” (p. 3).
The procedure used contains three interlinked working methods:
• Documenting, i. e. the systematic recording, compiling, arranging of data and facts;
• Reflecting, i. e. the periodic reviewing of developmental steps, evaluation of learning, job and life contexts and
drawing of conclusions;
• Implementing, i. e. solution-oriented and context-specific planning and strategy decision-making.
The procedure results in a personal portfolio and/or file for furnishing proof of specific competencies (files for
job applications, equivalency assessments) (p. 7).
Simona Sava et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 142 (2014) 176 – 182 179

2.1.2. Implementation
For a proper use of the CH-Q System of Managing Competencies, accompanying products are available, and a
coherent system of training for the specialists using the model has been designed. Also, accompanying tools have
been developed, and they are available for affordable prices. The CH-Q Association coordinates and monitors the
certification, and takes care of developing further products and tools for different sectors. Products include:
• Procedures based on methods and sets of contents, accompanied by specific tools and supporting actions;
• Quality criteria, principles and guidelines for implementation in education, training, career guidance, together
with a developed system of training experts and instruction manuals for specific groups of users.
Competency portfolios (folders) for consistent career planning
• Certification files to prepare for formal recognition (e. g., job applications)
• Identification documents for formal certificates (qualification passport).
The CH-Q Association provides a framework for quality assurance and includes the commission for certification.
It takes care that the CH-Q label is a trusting one, putting a big emphasis on the training system of the practitioners,
to make sure that the VPL process is carried out in a qualitative way.
The CH-Q is already used in five countries: Deutschland, Luxemburg, Holland, Austria and Flemish Belgium.

2.2. VPL model in the Netherlands

In the Netherlands in 2000 a first step was taken towards lifelong learning using the VPL (VPL; EVC or
Erkenning van Verworven Competenties in Dutch). EVC had to bridge the gap between the education supply and the
demand on the labour market side, by converting learning experiences into certificates or diplomas, and for the
development of competences in a career context (Werkgroep EVC 2000, apud Duvekot, 2010). In 2001, the
government established the Kenniscentrum EVC (Knowledge Centre on Accreditation of Prior Learning), to support
this application of EVC and to learn from the existing practice. Over the years 2005-2010, the Dutch government
invested nearly EUR 100 million in lifelong learning including EVC at upper secondary and higher vocational
education levels, in developing a regional infrastructure for learning and working and in promoting EVC
(Ervaringscertificaat) (Duvekot, 2010). From 2013, in the national strategy for VPL, the focus was changed from
overseeing the quality of and access to VPL towards a system focusing on Validation of Learning Outcomes for two
perspectives: (1) VPL for career steps on the labour market and access to non-formal training (sector standards); (2)
VNIL for career steps aiming at formal learning (national qualifications) (Duvekot, 2013).
Dutch higher education is a binary system of higher vocational education (HBO) and of universities (WO). EVC
is embedded in higher vocational education but not in universities (academic levels; apart from the Open
University). EVC is primarily an instrument for awarding exemptions for higher education programmes and for
admittance to higher education (Duvekot, 2010).

2.2.1. VPL concept


The VPL process in the Netherlands consists of five phases: (1) Information and advice for the candidate, the
employer or other organisation, etc. (2) Intake of the individual and making individual arrangements linked to the
individual’s defined career goals. The candidate decides on choice of qualification and whether to start the EVC
procedure or not. (3) Recognition of competences: portfolio (supported by the coach); (4) Validation of
competences: assessment (by the assessors); (5) EVC report: Description of results and accreditation (by the
assessor), compared with the individual career goals, together with advice on further personal development in the
direction of the individual defined career goals (Duvekot, 2013, p.13). On the other hand, EVC distinguishes
between two specific instruments:
1. The ‘Ervaringscertificaat’- is the formal procedure in which a candidate can get accreditation of his/her
learning outcomes. It is a summative approach; a portfolio is referred to a specific national qualification standard and
the accreditation consists of a number of credits that can be cashed in at a qualifying institute or school. The
portfolio therefore is a dossier-portfolio or a showcase of the relevant learning outcomes to be referred to at least one
specific standard. This form can be called Accreditation of Prior Learning (EVC).
2. The ‘Ervaringsprofiel’. This procedure sets up a generic, personal portfolio. It was developed in the context of
the economic crisis. It is a formative approach aimed at validation of all the generic competences of a candidate. It
180 Simona Sava et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 142 (2014) 176 – 182

advises on the possible opportunities for accreditation or personal development steps. It also points out what to do
when a specific qualification or diploma is at stake. This form can be called Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL or
in Dutch the informal HVC or Herkennen van Verworven Competenties ). (Duvekot, 2010, p.3).

2.2.2. Implementation
In the Netherlands the VPL process is introduced in public sectors: education, health care and welfare and in the
private sectors: engineering, process industry. Implementation includes: evaluation of VPL pilot, embed VPL in
human resource management, including financing, promulgate (new) organizational policy and individual
administers portfolio. There is a role knowledge infrastructure of implementation, with accreditation of VPL
assessors (internal/external) and quality control procedure (Duvekot, 2013, p. 15).
As it can be seen from the description, the VPL concept in the Netherlands is a flexible one, based on the decision
of the individuals, but planned for cohorts of people, a big emphasis being allotted to the VPL option at national
level. The Netherlands is one of the most active in this field, with a lot of developments, a large infrastructure and
resources, with tools and detailed differentiations with the quality view.

2.3. VPL model in the Nordic countries

The Nordic countries are among the countries in Europe with the longest tradition in introducing VPL, and ones
with the most active practices in this respect, mainly Finland (since 1996), Denmark and Norway. Their forum for
exchange and cooperation, the Nordic Network for Adult Learning, has facilitated sharing of experiences and
common reflections, for improved practices, and increased quality. Therefore, in 2013 the quality model for
validation of competencies in the Nordic countries was launched (Grunnet, Dahler, 2013). Previously, a comparative
study, for better mutual understanding, was commissioned (Hult, Andersson, 2008). Of course, each of the Nordic
countries can be an example of good practice in this regard, but the option for the cross analysis is sustained by the
trans-nationality of the product, making the transfer to another country easier.

2.3.1. VPL concept: for a quality model


In 2013 the quality model for validation in Nordic countries was launched (Grunnet, Dahler, 2013), as
aframework document “for collection, categorisation, and documentation of the work with quality in validation”
aiming “to ensure a certain consistency in descriptions and documentation of quality” (p. 4). The quality issue for
VPL is on the agenda at European level and in most of the member states, and such an attempt is a good example of
a transnational tool, in line with the CEDEFOP guidelines (Cedefop, 2009), contributing to improve the trust and
comparability of such certification path. Therefore, the Nordic model for quality assurance in validation is designed
quite broadly, following the logic of the VPL process: the individual is in the centre, and several factors are to be
taken into account for a proper accompanying of the person through the validation process (p.11): information,
preconditions, documentation, coordination, guidance, mapping, assessment, and follow-up – all of them with a
detailed description.

2.3.2. Implementation
The quality model is addressed primarily to the educational institutions (p. 13). The testing of the model was
carried out in all Nordic countries in different educational institutions, from different sectors (i.e., HEI in Norway, in
an upper secondary institution - NQF 3 in Iceland, on 3rd sector and trade unions in Denmark, and in Finland and
Sweden of VET system, NQF 4) to ensure its validity, irrespective of the educational level and sector.
Further specifications are made for ensuring organizational quality, the assessment quality and the procedural
quality, a set of quality indicators being attached to each of the 8 quality factors. But it distinctly mentioned that
quality assurance is an on-going improvement process, not a checklist to tick, being understood as a “dialogic,
circular, and recurring process whereby conditions, routines, methodology in the validation are continuously
evaluated and re-evaluated” (p. 16), and it is not dependant on the professionals carrying out the validation process,
but it is the responsibility of the whole institution.
Simona Sava et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 142 (2014) 176 – 182 181

This transnational model was chosen for analysis to underline the elements of transferability to different national
contexts, even for states where the national system of VPL is quite developed.
For instance, in Denmark, one of the countries with a fast development in the VPL sector, mainly since 2007,
with proper system, structures, and coordinating national centre implemented – The National Knowledge Centre for
Validation of Prior Learning - the framework and principles for assessment and quality assurance set to be followed
stipulate that “educational institutions are responsible for quality assurance. These principles state that the methods
used must ensure a reliable assessment, inspiring confidence in the outcome, and the institutions are obliged to have
an evaluation system. Educational institutions have to develop practice that ensures transparency and quality in the
process of recognition of prior learning” (Agaard, 2013).
To enable the educational institutions to perform in such a way, at national level the framework set by the
ministry also covered support tools like: publishing information materials, pamphlets, videos; supporting
developmental work in various educational fields; publishing a ‘good practice’ on-line booklet; commissioning a
report from The Danish Evaluation Institute on quality assurance in relation to VPL; setting, by the Centre for
Development of Human Resources (SCK – a state institution) the competence development training for VPL
practitioners, a pilot project to develop certified education for VPL professionals etc. (Aagard, 2013). Furthermore,
from 2013 the law stipulates that individuals can gain access to short-cycle and medium-cycle Higher Education
(Bachelor-level degrees) based on an individual competence assessment. It is again the responsibility of the higher
educational institutions to provide the necessary information and guidance for applicants, assessment procedures and
quality control, being a common practice to appoint a VPL officer or coordinator to undertake the actual
reinforcement and responsibility of the task (Aagard, 2013).
The examples chosen were meant to illustrate that there is more about commitment, about the principles to be
followed, about ensured quality as on-going ameliorative practice, about getting trust on VPL by systematic
development of tools and reliable practice, based on inner quality assurance concern.

3. Conclusions and discussions

Recognition of higher education qualifications, periods of study and prior learning has been a constant principle
in all the framework papers addressing the Bologna Process in higher education since 1998 (Zgaga, 2012, p. 28).
The examples presented show that there is not a need for very powerful national regulations for introducing VPL
practices at university and program level. The university autonomy allows such developments, and it is up to its
management and the openness of the program coordinators, once they set admission guidelines, to introduce the
VPL practice. Different successful bottom-up initiatives can be the basis for further top-down regulations. The
examples illustrated above show that even it is not a widely spread practice, in each of the three countries there are
universities implementing the VPL service, being up to each university to implement such alternative solutions.
A useful resource for all universities around Europe interested in introducing VPL practices has been gathered by
the European University Continuing Education Network (EUCEN) during the “Observal” project
(www.observal.org). The previous analysis also presented different tools that can be used and adapted. In addition,
the updated CEDEFOP inventory on validation of non-formal and informal learning can be a useful source of
inspiration on how synergies with the practices developed outside universities can be created, for complementing the
national lifelong learning policies by a common European approach, notably taken forward through the Bologna
process.
For instance, following the recommendations for internationalization, for setting up joint degrees within the
Bologna process and the European Space for Higher Education, a group of 10 universities from nine countries,
within the ESRALE project (“European Studies and Research in Adult and Learning Education”, an Erasmus
project, coordinated by the University of Kaiserslautern, between 2013-2016) is exploring the possibility of setting
up consecutive degree programs for master and PhD in adult education. Furthermore, they are exploring how the
access to the master level of the practitioners in adult education can be facilitated, working upon the experience of
running the European Master in Adult Education and the experience of running VPL services in universities from
some partner countries. West University of Timisoara as one of partners in this project will pilot such initiative.
Setting up such VPL provision, as comparable practice, with comparable tools in each partner university, even for
182 Simona Sava et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 142 (2014) 176 – 182

the Romanian universities can be a stronger argument for accepting such bottom-up initiative. Reflections on needed
VPL solutions for the adult learning professionals have been published (Konrad, 2007, Sava, 2012).
To conclude, the development and implementation of European and national qualifications frameworks have
increased the focus on integrating (‘mainstreaming’) validation of non-formal and informal learning in the overall
qualifications system. The same trend can be observed for credit systems, although currently less so. There is no
doubt, however, that the work on frameworks offers an opportunity to consider how validation and credit transfer
and accumulation, can contribute to a more comprehensive strategy on validating learning outcomes (Bjørnåvold, Le
Mouillour, 2009, p. 42). Such a trend cannot be stopped and in the near future. By bringing credible examples to
universities, by increasing awareness and trust of the university staff on the added value of the VPL, by providing
them with useful tools, it is expected that the VPL solution will enjoy a wider acceptance and implementation.

References

Aagard, K. et al. (2013). National state of art Denmark concerning design and application of VPL. www.allinhe.eu –not published.
Bjørnåvold, J., & I. Le Mouillour. (2009). Learning outcomes in validation and credit systems. European Journal for Vocational Training, 3(48),
27-47.
Calonder Gerster, A.E. (2004). CH-Q System of Managing Competencies Integrated Concept for Bottom-up processes Basic Features,
Implementation Criteria for the Recording, Assessing, Recognizing of Competencies and Qualifications. www.ch-q.ch
CEDEFOP. (2009). European guidelines for validating non-formal and informal learning. Retrieved from
http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/Files/4054_en.pdf in December 2013.
CEDEFOP. (2010). A bridge to the future European policy for vocational education and training 2002-10. Luxembourg: Publications Office of
the European Union. http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/Files/3058_en.pdf
Council of Europe (2012). Proposal for a Council Recommendation on the validation of non-formal and informal learning. Brussels. COM(2012)
485. http://eur-ex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2012:0485:FIN:en:PDF
Duvekot, R. (2010). Update to the European Inventory on Validation of Non-formal and informal learning. Country Report: Netherlands.
CEDEFOP: http://libserver.cedefop.europa.eu/vetelib/2011/77473.pdf.
European Commission. (2011). Adult in Formal Education: Policies and Practice in Europe. http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/adults-in-formal-
education-pbEC3111017/
European Commission. (2012). Commission Staff Working Paper Impact Assessment, Brussels, Retrieved from:
http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/doc/informal/impact_en.pdf; in dec.2013.
European Commission. (2012b). Rethinking education: investing in skills for better socio-economic outcomes. Strasbourg.
http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/Files/com669_en.pdf
European Commission. (2013). Education and training in Europe 2020 – Responses from EU Member States. Eurydice Report. Luxembourg:
Publications Office of the European Union. ISBN 978-92-9201-512-1. doi:10.2797/49490. Retrieved from
http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice in Dec. 2013.
European Union. (2013). Developing the Adult Education Sector: Opening up Higher Education to Adults. Luxembourg: Publications Office of
the European Union. ISBN 978-92-79-34590-6. DOI: 10.2766/65164
Grunnet, H., & Dahler, A., M. (2013). Quality model for validation in the Nordic Countries. www.nordvux.net
Hult, A., & Andersson, P. (2008). Validation in the Nordic countries – Policies and practices. Nordic Network for Adult Learning.
InHolland University (2013). National state of art Netherlands concerning design and application of VPL. www.allinhe.eu –not published
Konrad, J. (2007). Developing a competence-based approach to the assessment of APEL Professionals. In: Duvekot, R.C. u.a. (Hg.) (2007):
Managing European diversity in lifelong learning. The many perspectives of the Valuation of Prior Learning in the European workplace.
Nijmegen, /Vught/ Amsterdam, S. 95-102.
Sava, S. (2012). Validating the Pedagogical Competencies of Adult Learning Professionals. In Rolf Arnold (Ed.), Entgrenzungen des Lernens;
Internationale Perspektiven fur die Erwachsenenbildung (pp. 159 – 174). Bielefeld: W. Bertelsmann Verlag
Stiftung ECAP (2013). National state of art Switzerland concerning design and application of VPL-systematic. www.allinhe.eu –not published
Zgaga, P. (2012). Reconsidering EHEA Principles: Is there a “Bologna Philosophy”?. In A. Curaj, P. Scott, L. Vlasceanu, L Wilson. (2012.eds.).
European Higher Education at the Crossroads – Between Bologna Process and national Reforms. London: Springer.

You might also like