Tartalmainknak csak egy része érhető el az Ön által választott nyelven. Tekintse meg, milyen tartalom érhető el ezen a nyelven Magyar.

Automatic translation is available for this page in Hungarian Translate this page

1.3. Indicator 3 – Recognition of learning outcomes

The 2011 Council Recommendation “Youth on the move” assigns to countries the objective of promoting the international mobility of IVET learners through enhancing the recognition of learning outcomes based on the use of existing EU tools and by improving the recognition procedures.

The indicator for monitoring developments in this area is based on the following seven criteria:

  • Countries have a process for setting up countrywide policy targets (whether quantitative or qualitative) in the area of recognition of learning outcomes acquired abroad by IVET learners;
  • The recognition mechanism can take into account the six following types of learning components and outcomes: courses, credit points, units, modules, programmes, and qualifications / diplomas / degrees;
  • The approach to recognition s coordinated countrywide;;
  • The existing approach to recognition is subject to evaluation oriented to improving the next generation of this policy strand;
  • After the end of the mobility period or upon submission of a request for recognition, there is a short (six weeks or less) regulatory time limit for granting recognition or processing applications for recognition;
  • Where necessary, there is an evaluated policy for making more visible contact points where IVET learners can obtain information on how learning outcomes and qualifications acquired abroad can be recognised and certified;
  • The Europass Mobility Document, Europass Certificate Supplement, ECVET, the EQF/NQF, and the learning outcomes approach are in use in the country for purposes of visibility, transfer and recognition in IVET international mobility.

The table below presents the indicator in terms of criteria and benchmarks.

Indicator 3 – Recognition of learning outcomes

 

Criterion 3.1 – Target setting

Criterion 3.2 – Scope of recognition

Criterion 3.3 – Coordination

Criterion 3.4 - Evaluation

Criterion 3.5 – Time frame

Criterion 3.6 – Visibility policy

Criterion 3.7 – Use of EU tools

 

Description of criterion

Description of criterion

Description of criterion

Description of criterion

Description of criterion

Description of criterion

Description of criterion

 

Countries have a process for setting up countrywide policy targets (whether quantitative or qualitative) in the area of recognition of learning outcomes acquired abroad by IVET learners

The recognition mechanism can take into account courses, credit points, units, modules, programmes, and qualifications / diplomas / degrees

The approach to recognition is coordinated countrywide

The approach to recognition is subject to evaluation oriented to improving it in future

After the end of the mobility period or upon submission of a request for recognition, there is a short (six weeks or less) regulatory time limit for granting recognition or processing applications for recognition

Where necessary, there is an evaluated policy for making more visible contact points where IVET learners can obtain information on recognition

The Europass Mobility Document, Europass Certificate Supplement, ECVET, the EQF/NQF, and the learning outcomes approach are used in the country for visibility, transfer and recognition in IVET international mobility

 

Description of benchmarks

Description of benchmarks

Description of benchmarks

Description of benchmarks

Description of benchmarks

Description of benchmarks

Description of benchmarks

5

A process is in place

The recognition mechanism can take into account courses, credit points, units, modules, programmes, and qualifications / diplomas / degrees

Complete countrywide coordination of the approach to recognition (recognition is processed within a countrywide framework which is set by regulations and/or arrangements agreed between players)

The approach to recognition is evaluated: not only is it monitored (e.g. through reports, audits, user surveys, etc.), but also recommendations for future improvement are set up, implemented and followed up along time for (re)adjustment as necessary.

Regulatory time limit of six weeks or less

A visibility policy is not necessary or, if it is, has been put in place and is subject to regular evaluation which translates in implemented recommendations oriented towards reforms

The five EU tools are used

4

 

The recognition mechanism can take into account only five of the six learning components

Incomplete coordination of the recognition mechanism is in place (elements of coordination exist, but no complete countrywide coordination of all players or actions).

The approach to recognition is monitored (e.g. through reports, audits, user surveys, etc.). But there is no systematic process of setting up recommendations for future improvement, implementing them, and following them up along time for (re)adjustment. However, a plan to set up such a systematic process has been at least initiated, e.g. in the form of preliminary preparation, initial debate / consultation / design, etc.

Regulatory time limit of seven to 12 weeks

A visibility policy is in place and subject to monitoring that does not systematically translate in implemented recommendations oriented towards reforms

Four of the five EU tools are used

3

 

The recognition mechanism can take into account only four of the six learning components

Incomplete coordination of the recognition mechanism is in place (elements of coordination exist, but no complete countrywide coordination of all players or actions). No plans to make the coordination complete are being prepared.

The approach to recognition is monitored. But there is no systematic process of setting up recommendations oriented towards future improvement, and no plan to develop any.

Regulatory time limit of more than 12 weeks

A visibility policy is in place but is not monitored

Three of the five EU tools are used

2

No such process exists but there is an intention to set up one

The recognition mechanism can take into account only three of the six learning components

No countrywide coordination of the approach to recognition is in place, but preliminary preparation (initial debate, consultation, design, planning, etc.) to develop one has begun

The approach to recognition is not monitored. A plan to develop a monitoring or evaluation process has been at least initiated, e.g. in the form of preliminary preparation, initial debate / consultation / design, etc.

There is no regulatory time limit but in practice recognition takes 12 weeks or less

There is no visibility policy, but preliminary preparation (initial debate, consultation, design, planning, etc.) to develop one has begun

Two of the five EU tools are used

1

No such process exists and there is no intention to set up any

The recognition mechanism can take into account no more than two of the six learning components

No countrywide coordination of the approach to recognition is in place, and there is no plan to set up any

The approach to recognition is not monitored, and there is no plan to develop any monitoring or evaluation process.

There is no regulatory time limit but in practice recognition takes more than 12 weeks, or there is no particular time limit

There is no visibility policy, and no plan to set any

One or none of the five EU tools is used