Catálogo de publicaciones - libros

The introduction signals the high relevance of RVA to UNESCO, and how RVA ranks among the possible ways to redress the glaring lack of relevant qualifications in many developing countries by promoting the development of competences and certification procedures which recognise different types of learning, including formal, non-formal and informal learning, everyday knowledge and skills, practical wisdom and indigenous knowledge. The notion of “cognitive justice” is introduced to emphasise this making of other ways of knowing visible, and revising the relationship between authorised and devalued forms of knowledge and knowing by formalising them.

The notion of a “learning society” is shown to have far reaching implications not only for the redirection of the formal educational system but also for policies, theories and practices concerned with lifelong learning in which the educative possibilities of informal learning need to be adequately valued and considered as equally worthwhile as formal learning.

The distinctive contribution of the study to the RVA discussion is to harness lessons learnt about RVA from many contexts and to share that learning across countries. It is argued that, in a way, the learning systems of “the North” and “the South” face the same general issues of social inequality, and one of the principal consequences of such inequality is a major under-utilisation of existing human potential, talents and human resources, which people may have acquired in non-formal and informal learning settings.

Sen’s observations on “individual freedoms” and “choices” are used to suggest that broadening the scope of recognition, validation and accreditation to include all types of learning outside the mainstream mutually reinforces human capabilities in a society and the opportunities that the society offers. These freedoms and choices are also the principal determinants of individual initiative and social effectiveness and are also to be seen in notion of agency which entails the reformulation and renewal of knowledge and competences as well as the capability to mobilise resources (that is, other people/institutions/technologies) in order to address arising challenges.

Thus the issue of the balance between human and social capital is an important one facing RVA policy makers and providers, appealing to the pragmatic needs of the employers and learners while retaining the cultural interest and knowledge of those who perceive the value of learning as predominantly a means of personal development and self and community fulfilment.

This chapter builds on the concept of lifelong learning describing lifelong learning as a standard that promotes learning on a holistic basis. But it also points to the several challenges in the implementation of lifelong learning at both a systemic and an individual level.

The definition of non-formal and informal learning remains a subject of discussion in the field of RVA. For many it is more helpful to speak of a formal-non-formal-informal continuum, for many others, drawing a firm line is seen as a way to rectify the distorted balance between formal learning vis-à-vis non-formal and informal learning.

World-wide the adoption of the lifelong learning approach has given rise to the need for a more flexible and integrated system of qualifications. In a number of countries National Qualifications Frameworks have been developed in response to the growing need to recognise learning and knowledge that has been achieved outside the formal education.

Two models of RVA are presented – the convergent and the parallel models. It is argues that both of these models overlap. On the one hand, RVA interacts by necessity with predefined categories. On the other hand, it challenges normative classifications of knowledge. While there is a clear distinction between formative and summative assessment, and convergent and parallel models, they are linked and evolving processes.

Finally, sharing learning across North and South has brought to the fore the disparate issues relating to RVA in the North and South.

The chapter on policy and legislative environment highlights the differences between countries that have an overarching legal framework specifically for RVA, and others that have a range of relevant legal acts and regulations set in the formal education and training systems. But not all RVA activity is necessarily linked to governmental policy and legislative activity as in the US.

Countries with NQFs have institutionalised RVA as a requirement of any accredited training within the NQF. However, further interrogation is required on whether NQF legislation alone is able to ensure that RVA is taken on board; or, whether other legislations specific to RVA are needed.

Another question is whether countries with a uniform policy and legislation on RVA are more likely to develop systems of RVA than is the case where such legislation is absent.

Legislation is an important aspect of RVA in European countries and is linked to the notion of individual rights and wide involvement of several stakeholders.

This chapter examines the variations in the purposes of RVA across and within countries. While countries tend to concentrate on one or the other purposes depending upon the contexts and circumstances, country practice actually show the need to link the different contexts, keeping in mind the entire range of social, economic, cultural and personal purposes.

Besides providers in the formal context, non-formal and individual education and training providers also exist.

A range of themes relating to RVA’s role in workforce development are highlighted, ranging from RVA used in rehabilitation courses administered through employment agencies, RVA used by training providers in particular industries and for attracting migrant labour to linking academic credit to non-credit workforce programmes.

Drawing on Amartya Sen’s distinction between human capital and social opportunities, this chapter has highlighted how countries use RVA as a tool to increase the number of persons with higher education, as well as targeted special groups for the promotion of social inclusion.

Beyond the bounds of external dimensions of personal development (improving career and employment prospects), RVA contributes to self-esteem, confidence and motivation, greater awareness, improving personal reflection, increased confidence and self-directed learning management.

This chapter has shown that a diversity of approaches exist to the recognition of competences and outcomes from non-formal and informal learning, as well as a diversity of options to access education, training and qualifications.

Various partnerships between stakeholders drive the coordination and implementation of RVA. Cooperation with industrial organisations and the private sector can be advantageous; however, there are issues that the capacities promoted will often be narrowly focused around market sector skills.

Public authorities have an important role to play through a broad range of activities including the development of goal-oriented public policies on RVA, the identification of key sectors in the economy requiring sustained efforts to build human capital; as well as collaborative work among different ministries etc.

The shared responsibility or “social partnership” model based on close cooperation between the government, social partners and other societal stakeholders is becoming an inevitable feature of the development and implementation of RVA policies and practice.

A unique feature of stakeholder involvement in the adult learning sector has been the engagement of adult educators. Canada, the US and UK have promoted RVA as a social movement for adult participation.

In developing countries, with vast decentralised systems of non-formal and adult education, NGOs and voluntary agencies, as well as local and district governments are active in imparting non-formal education to socio-economically weaker sections.

With a broad range of interests at stake, many objectives formulated in RVA policy respond to economic goals. Other objectives relate more closely to education and training system and qualifications reforms.

In all countries, however, promoting and facilitating the integration and empowerment of marginalised social groups and individuals (uneducated and unemployed) and strengthening the motivation for lifelong learning are highly important policy objectives.

Despite the various options for recognition according to the interests at stake, the chapter argues that all actors must be responsible for rendering competences visible and documenting them and enabling the process towards a qualification, diploma or certificate in cooperation with national authorities, and without neglecting coherence, transparency and quality. Recognition policies therefore need to reflect directly the level of cooperation and consensus-building between education, employment, economic and civil society actors.

This chapter highlights the development of best practice in RVA and illustrates where this can occur, describing experiences ranging from countries with established practices of recognition to those which are still in the process of establishing systems of recognition.

A key consideration given in this chapter is to the field of standards and methods of assessment. A variety of standards and methods are used in different sectors (education and training sectors, employment and enterprise sectors, non-governmental organisations and community-based learning voluntary sectors, etc.) within the countries examined in this study. Consideration is also given to how assessment methods meet the given standards and the type of learning outcomes and competences used by countries as reference points for the recognition of non-formal and informal learning. A second consideration concerns the delivery of recognition, particularly the role of education and training providers in recognition, as well as the professional development of trainers, assessors, advisors and counselors. A final field of enquiry concerns the theme of quality assurance – an issue which cuts across all of the previous topics. Here, we examine the arrangements put in place by countries to support the recognition of non-formal and informal learning by way of developing policy guidelines, quality criteria, coordinating delivery, and strengthening the credibility of the recognition process. Using country data several issues are also raised. For example, the issue of how quality is defined and who sets the criteria by which each term is understood. The question of difference between standards set by stakeholders in the education sector and those in industry, has also been raised. There are also questions about whether adults are taken into account in decisions about assessment standards. Some other issues dealt with in the chapter are questions of who is given the authority to determine quality.

The chapter’s main purpose is not to offer a single model of recognition that is universally transferable, but rather to highlight successful aspects of different systems that can be usefully transmitted between countries.

This concluding chapter reflects on emerging cross-country/regional patterns, convergences and divergences, and comments on challenges and critical factors conducive to the implementation of RVA. The aim is to arrive at common benchmarks which policy makers and practitioners could use to ensure that policies and practice articulate more purposefully with the holistic principles of lifelong learning and sustainable development.

Looking at some of the differences and commonalities within themes on RVA’s strategic value, the chapter highlights the importance of the role of legislative reforms, the need to calibrate with broader policy objectives, and the need for a coordinated structure for linking the efforts of all stakeholders and national authorities. While countries embed RVA in lifelong policies, there are a number of interpretations of lifelong learning that play a crucial role in determining the scope of the resulting RVA policy.

Based on the review of RVA in different country contexts we found that RVA is focused on different aims – to achieve official qualification, as an entry door to formal tertiary education institutions, and as a means to make competences and learning visible. Learning outcomes, with their emphasis on achievements rather than pathways are clearly important in opening up qualifications to RVA. However different approaches to linking RVA to national reference points – which are not mutually exclusive – can be grouped. Further efforts are required in partnership with all stakeholders to clarify issues relating to learning outcomes approaches in terms of concepts, assessment methodologies and tools, and the balance between outcome orientation and input factors.

Only further research can tell if NQFs are leading to RVA or whether RVA is causing NQFs to be established. In any case, there are parallel or divergent tendencies to be seen in several countries for NQFs to serve the labour market with skilled labour, to provide a means to recognise learning that takes place outside the formal education sector, and to help those who have dropped out of the academic system to receive training oriented more strongly towards vocational practice. The recognition of non-formal and informal learning thus becomes a key issue in NQF developments.

Competences and talents can be made visible not only against pre-set standards, but also geared at enabling individuals to manage their own development needs and build their own competences. Formal structures such as qualifications structures will then serve more as a reference framework within which there is individual choice. At the same time, quality practice show that utilization of agreed standards or benchmarks is an important feature of RVA, and combining traditional methods and tests with other methods such as practical demonstrations has allowed relatively flexible procedures. Professionalisation is an important issue in RVA, including guidance and counseling. But professionalisation alone is not enough. There is need for proper quality assurance of policies, procedures and process for gaining trust among users. An important element of quality is the issue of quality of outcomes and impact in RVA both in term of evidence on uptake, the use of tools as well as qualitative improvements.

The final section takes up the issue of challenges which are at one and the same time also factors conducive to the implementation RVA. These factors include realising the full potential of RVA; financing RVA; collecting sufficient data on RVA outcomes; furthering linkages between educational institutions, workplaces and community life; transcending cultural resistance to RVA; communicating opportunities presented by RVA to all stakeholders; encouraging companies and individuals to access RVA opportunities; and strengthening regional and sub-regional cooperation across countries.

Finally there are challenges specific to developing countries to which RVA policy and practice need to address. A great deal of non-formal education still remains marginalised, as there are no proper frameworks to accredit the programmes. There are also several issues related to planning and developing RVA for the informal sector in low- and middle income as well as emerging economies.