Approaches and tools for comparing and recognising VET qualifications Insights from Cedefop's research

Approaches and tools for comparing and recognising VET qualifications Insights from Cedefop’s research Towards a methodology for comparing and recognising VET qualifications Vasileios Symeonidis (0000-0002-3173-3560), Carita Blomqvist (0009-0005-0944-6484) Experts in Qualifications and Credentials 02/06/2025 Overview 1.Introduction 2.The EU policy background and Cedefop’s contribution 3.Main objectives and methods of the study 4.Findings 5.Concluding remarks 6.Next steps 2 Introduction The EU’s working-age population is projected to decline by 57.4 million by 2100 (European Commission, 2023) 24 million individuals aged 20-64 have an unmet need for employment (Eurostat, 2024) Rise in regulated professions from 5,400 (2016) to 5,700 (2023) (European Court of Auditors, 2024). Comparing and recognising can: oIdentify differences and similarities to recognise qualifications and skills across institutions and borders. oFacilitate access to employment and learning opportunities. ‘Formal recognition of learning outcomes’ (European Council, 2017) 3 Multiple challenges Technical Methodological Mutual trust Political 4 1957 Treaty of Rome 1975 Cedefop’s founding regulation 1985 Council Decision on comparability of VET qualifications 2008 EQF Recommendation 2025 Union of Skills EU policy background 5 …from mutual recognition to comparability and transparency… …from inputs to learning outcomes… Cedefop’s contribution 2009 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 6 Main objectives and methods of the study 1. How have existing EU transparency tools facilitated the process of comparing and recognising VET qualifications in Europe, and what opportunities exist for their enhancement? 2. How do national authorities and stakeholders across Europe currently compare and recognise VET qualifications? 3. What common themes and concepts can be identified that could help develop a practically oriented framework for comparing and recognising VET qualifications for diverse purposes in Europe? RESEARCH QUESTIONS 7 Mapping and analysis of existing EU transparency tools regarding recognition ReferNet survey (27 countries responded) In-depth expert interviews (N=22) Existing knowledge within CEDEFOP supported the analysis Main objectives and methods of the study STUDY’S SCOPE DATA ANALYSIS foreign qualifications defined as part of each country’s VET, incl. post-secondary and higher VET qualifications. 8 Main themes 1. Availability of and access to information on qualifications, learning outcomes and recognition procedures 2. Processing of information regarding comparison and recognition 3. Diverse recognition practices 4. Addressing mutual trust through political cooperation and framework building 5. Future-proofing via systematic learning from and between Member States, existing tools, available research and piloting 9 Other European tools used by countries: ESCO 16 Mentioned in connection with EURES, Europass, national databases, qualification standards Divided views on its potential as a comparison tool with conditions (e.g. AI-supported matching tools) or too detailed and/or not fitting into national systems; also potential is seen Europass Diploma Supplement and Certificate Supplement considered useful Overall considered as useful digital tool for obtaining information on qualifications Lisbon Recognition Convention (LRC) All countries have ratified the LRC and use it in connection with HE Some countries apply its principles to VET Recommendation on Automatic Recognition Mentioned in many responses, mostly in connection with HE European Learning Model (ELM) Countries have only recently started mapping exercises or implementation Some countries report on its potential for comparing qualifications The role of learning outcomes 17 Frequent reference to curricula, programmes and learning outcomes Learning outcomes are used to define the NQF level of qualifications Balance occupation-specific (professional) skills/ general subjects / and transversal skills not visible  Most attention on occupation-specific skills Differences in quality and granularity of descriptors; Generality of learning outcomes (sometimes seen as abstract); Translation issues; Comparison of the content/learning outcomes is considered labour-intensive. PERSISTING BARRIERS Priority solutions Initiate co-operation between Member States on the use of AI language models, building on the conceptual specifics of qualifications and learning outcomes. Conceptual clarification and implementation of AI language models need to evolve according to accumulated experience. Critical look on digital transparency tools from the perspective of the needs of individual learners and employees. Intensify co-operation between Member States to develop consistent and comprehensive use of existing comparison and recognition tools. 18 3. Diverse recognition practices 19 © stock.adobe.com Main challenges Rigidity in assessing foreign VET qualifications. Recognition practices sometimes implicitly used for protecting sector or other interests. (Too) many criteria being used. Learning outcomes are not presented in a way that they could be used as a basis for recognition. Learning outcomes are not fully understood by those making decisions. Many approaches and actors in one country, which may lead to difficulties in coordinating the work and confuse individuals. 20 21 Recognition practices: How do countries compare? Purpose of comparison: further study, labour market, divided into regulated and non-regulated professions Case-by-case analysis Automatic recognition appears to be rare - exceptions under the PQD or bi-/multilateral government agreements National qualification and/or professional standards (occupations) are used as benchmarks Sometimes through supported assessment (e.g. expert commissions/panels) Additional requirements may be requested Criteria for comparison/recognition of qualifications Context-related •Legal basis •Qualification system in the country of origin •Place of the qualification in the qualification system •Authenticity of documents Quality-related •Status of the institution •Independent external evaluation of the training or institution Qualification-related •Status/title •NQF/EQF level •Formal rights •Duration •Credits •Subjects, structure, practical training •Learning outcomes 22 Concept of ‘substantial difference’ Well known-concept, but little information on what it implies in practice Some countries use the UNESCO Global Recognition Convention definition ‘Limits’ mentioned related to: content, duration, need for equivalency exams 23 Priority solutions More aligned and transparent approaches for comparison and recognition balancing the need for gatekeeping with interests of learners. Critical look at the number of actors. European co-operation and network for exchanging information and agreeing on key criteria and good practice for recognition of VET qualifications. Strengthen common understanding about the concept of substantial difference. 24 4. Addressing mutual trust through political co-operation and framework building 25 © stock.adobe.com Concluding remarks EU transparency tools have been instrumental but lack full coherence and visibility. Learning outcomes are crucial for recognition processes, but the specifics of how and under which conditions this can be achieved require further research. Digitalisation and AI can enhance the efficiency and accessibility of transparency tools but require a systematic approach and conceptual clarity. Achieving conceptual clarity is crucial to ensure consistency and transparency. Building mutual trust between national qualification systems and for different types of qualifications is essential. 32 Taking work further Cedefop working paper ‘Policies and tools for comparing and recognising VET qualifications – An overview’ Follow-up project 2026 – 2028 ‘From comparing to recognising VET qualifications: Towards a practice-oriented methodology’, with 3 thematic areas: Approaches and criteria for comparing and recognising VET qualifications for learning and work; The use of digitalisation and transparency tools to support comparison and recognition of VET qualifications; Recognising foreign VET qualifications for the purpose of employment. 33 www.cedefop.europa.eu Follow us on social media Thank you Images copyright: © stock.adobe.com Contact details: Vasileios SYMEONIDIS https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3173-3560 V[email protected] Carita BLOMQVIST https://orcid.org/0009-0005-0944-6484 [email protected] Zelda AZZARA https://orcid.org/0009-0001-5904-7693 Zelda.Azz[email protected] Project page: Comparison and recognition of learning outcomes: www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/projects/comparing-vet-qualifications DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15720568