REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Evaluation of the European Qualification Framework (EQF) Implementation of the Recommendation of the European Parliament and the Council on the Establishment of the European Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning
Date: 2013-12-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: continuing education, labour mobility, learning, professional qualifications, recognition of diplomas, recognition of vocational training qualifications, student mobility













EUR-Lex - 52013DC0897 - EN











|



52013DC0897

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Evaluation of the European Qualification Framework (EQF) Implementation of the Recommendation of the European Parliament and the Council on the Establishment of the European Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning /* COM/2013/0897 final */









1.           Introduction
The European Qualifications
Framework (EQF)[1] promotes lifelong learning and
improves learner and worker mobility, employability and social integration by
creating a European reference framework for qualifications systems. The EQF makes
it easier to compare and recognise the qualifications of millions of graduates
looking for further learning opportunities or entering the labour market across
 Europe each year. For example, the Czech Republic awarded 900 kinds of
vocational qualifications to almost 150 000 students in 2012. In the same
year, approximately 69000 types of regulated qualifications were awarded to
about 16.8 million learners in the UK. 
The EQF represents
a new approach to European cooperation on qualifications. It introduces eight
reference levels described in terms of learning outcomes, spanning all forms
and levels of qualifications. This focus on learning outcomes puts the learner
at the centre, and is important when comparing and recognising qualifications from
different countries and different learning contexts.
The Commission has
consistently underlined the importance of supporting the comparability of
skills and qualifications across the EU, especially in the context of today’s
high unemployment levels, as doing so makes it easier for learners and workers
to move across countries and occupations. Enabling learners and workers to
present their skills and qualifications acquired in formal, non-formal or
informal learning environments is especially important in the context of Europe
2020 flagship initiatives ‘Youth on the move’, the ‘Agenda for new skills and
jobs’ and the ‘Digital Agenda’, as well as the ‘Towards a job-rich recovery’
Employment Package and the Council recommendation on the validation of
non-formal and informal learning. To support this work and ensure that skills
and qualifications can be easily recognised across borders, the Commission
announced its intention to create a ‘European Area for Skills and
Qualifications’ as part of its ‘Rethinking Education’ initiative[2]
. 
The
EQF is stimulating national governments to make recognising qualifications
easier and more transparent: 36 countries voluntarily participate in the EQF
(28 EU Member States, five candidate countries, and Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland).
This report presents the EQF experience so far and discusses possible
implications for the future. It looks at whether the recommendation in its
current form can cope with new challenges caused by rapid socio-economic and
technological changes, and if it fosters flexible learning. This evaluation
comes at a time of particular significance, to address high unemployment and
the increasing number of available learning opportunities and qualifications.
Challenges include the increasing number of qualifications offered by private
providers, more international qualifications, and the
recent emergence of Massive Open Online
Courses (MOOCs), which have the potential to reach
many students. This evaluation, together
with the Europass and EQAVET evaluations and the progress report on quality
assurance in higher education, will help identify challenges for and possible
improvements to the European Area of Skills and Qualifications.
              
2.           outcomes and impact
2.1.       The main features of the EQF
The following elements are at the core of the
EQF:
•       
Eight European reference
levels defined in terms of
learning outcomes and able to capture all types and levels of qualifications
across Europe. EQF levels 5, 6, 7 and 8 are compatible with the descriptors of
short cycle qualifications and the three cycles of the Framework for
Qualifications of the European Higher Education Area (QF-EHEA);[3]
•       
Learning outcomes
approach. The level descriptors
are expressed in terms of knowledge, skills and competences, and are not linked
to elements of the learning context, such as learning duration or location;
•       
Common principles for
quality assurance in higher
education and vocational education and training in the context of the EQF.
An EQF Advisory Group (AG)
was created and National Coordination Points (NCPs) were set up in Member
States to implement the EQF.
The AG ensures overall coherence and promotes
transparency of the process of relating qualifications systems to the EQF. In
its role to support referencing in 2009 the EQF AG adopted ten criteria and procedures
for referencing national qualifications levels to the EQF[4].
These have helped establish a common approach to presenting referencing results
to stakeholders. All countries use these criteria to structure their national
referencing reports. Some criteria (in particular criteria 3 and 4) could be
interpreted in a variety of ways and need further clarification to ensure the
overall coherence of the referencing process.
The NCPs support and, in
conjunction with other relevant national authorities, guide the relationship
between national qualifications systems and the EQF and promote the quality and
transparency of that relationship.
2.2.       Accelerating implementation: a new sense of urgency is needed
The recommendation includes
two target dates:
•        
2010: Member States should relate
their national qualifications systems to the EQF, in particular by referencing
their qualifications levels to the EQF and, where necessary, developing
national qualifications frameworks (NQFs);
•        
2012: all new qualification
certificates, diplomas and ‘Europass’ documents issued by the competent
authorities must contain a clear reference to the relevant EQF level.
The 2010 milestone
By 2010, four Member States had referenced
their national qualifications systems. Three of them already had an NQF in
place in 2008. 
By June 2013, twenty Member States had
presented their national reports on referencing to the EQF. The remaining
countries (eight Member States, four candidate countries, and Norway) plan to finalise their referencing in 2013-14.
 By end of 2010 || FR, IE, MT, UK 
 2011 || BE-vl, CZ, DK, EE, LT, LV, NL, PT 
 2012 || AT, DE, HR, LU 
 2013 || BG, IT, PL, SI 
 To reference || Member States: BE-fr, BE-de, EL, ES, FI, HU, KY, RO, SE, SK, Candidate countries: IS, ME, MK, TK EEA country: NO 
Table
1 — Overview of the implementation of the EQF
Recommendation’s the first milestone, September 2013
This shows that the Recommendation generates
reforms — for example, the development of comprehensive NQFs based on learning
outcomes — which require significant political and technical engagement from a
variety of stakeholders. Such developments take time. Therefore, despite the
strong national commitment to the EQF, the delay in its implementation becomes
visible.. To avoid further delays, all countries should finalise their
referencing processes by the end of 2014 and implement the recommendation more
quickly. The Commission will strengthen its monitoring of the EQF’s
implementation at national level, if necessary through bilateral exchanges, to help
individual countries overcome their specific challenges.
It should be noted that a referencing
report is a snapshot of a country’s qualifications system, whereas referencing
is a continuous process of reflection on changing qualifications systems.
Therefore, countries should regularly review their referencing reports and
inform the AG about any changes and about how they responded to stakeholders’
comments. The AG should set criteria and procedures for following up on
developments in national qualifications systems and their impact on
referencing.
The 2012 milestone
The second milestone has
the benefit of bringing the EQF directly to learners, workers, education and
training institutions, and to employers. Including EQF levels on qualifications
and supplements is a major step towards making it easier to better compare
qualifications across borders.
Missing the referencing
milestone caused significant delays in meeting this second milestone. Only one country included EQF levels in its Europass
supplements by 2012. Two countries included EQF levels in their qualification
databases. By September 2013, three countries had issued qualifications that
referenced an EQF level and five countries had started including EQF levels in their
Europass supplements. Six further countries plan to start doing this in
2013-14.
   || End of 2012 ||  Sept. 2013 
 EQF level included in new certificates and diplomas ||   ||   CZ, DK, LT 
 EQF level included in Europass supplements — Diploma Supplement (ds) and/or Certificate Supplement (cs) || FR (cs)   ||   CZ (cs), DK (ds), EE (ds), IE (ds) 
 EQF level included in national qualifications databases || FR, UK ||   CZ, DK, 
Table 2: Overview of the implementation of the EQF Recommendation’s
second milestone
Reaching the second milestone is now urgent. Including
the EQF level and clearly describe the learning outcomes acquired gives a
powerful tool to people to better communicate about the level and variety of
their skills and qualifications. This is especially important in times of
crisis. It is now urgent to step up work at national level to ensure that by
the end of 2014 at least a quarter of all qualifications issued in Europe include an EQF reference. 
Countries approach the second milestone in
different ways. Most national authorities are considering technical solutions
to be systematically used at national level. Others leave it up to the
institutions that award qualifications to decide if and how to include EQF
levels in certificates, diplomas, Europass supplements and qualifications
databases. Overall, countries agree that a common EU approach is needed to
ensure the same level of transparency to all learners and workers. The AG
should develop such a common approach.
2.3 A coherent system
The eight-level structure of
the EQF is applicable to national qualifications systems and to stakeholders
needs. Most countries have or develop comprehensive NQFs that cover all types
and levels of qualifications in formal education and training systems. The
number of NQF levels depends on national needs.
The EQF’s overall principles
and architecture — the definition of ‘qualification’ and the levels based on
learning outcomes — make it easier to compare qualifications. However, a few
substantial issues should be considered for future improvements:

 While the EQF aims to be a
     reference point for all qualifications in Europe regardless of what body
     awards them, most NQFs are limited to qualifications awarded by public
     education and training institutions. Only few NQFs cover qualifications
     awarded outside formal systems, for example in the private sector, which
     are often important on the labour market. A key challenge is to ensure
     that all qualifications in NQFs, including those acquired through
     non-formal and informal learning are trustworthy and meet basic quality
     requirements. The AG should give guidance on common criteria to be
     considered for including qualifications in NQFs.
 Current EQF features may not
     be suited to new developments. New practices such as blended learning are
     increasingly used. MOOCs are a recent development in distance education,
     and make it possible to organise learning across borders and time zones,
     anywhere that is connected to the internet.

Qualifications are also awarded by international bodies and
multinational companies in various countries in Europe and beyond. Some countries
have included them in their NQFs, but not always with the same EQF level. These
issues call for a coherent approach in referencing to the EQF by all countries
to avoid confusion to employers and qualifications holders. 

 EQF level descriptors for ‘knowledge’
     and ‘skills’ match national descriptors. However, the ‘competence’
     descriptor is more problematic as the descriptor included in Annex II is
     not fully consistent with the definition of ‘competence’ in Annex I. The
     ‘competence’ descriptor should therefore be clarified.
 The common principles on quality
     assurance have helped countries going through the referencing process.
     Although they were intended to address only vocational education and
     training and higher education qualifications, they are of course relevant
     to other qualifications as well. Their potential to provide guidance for
     all levels and all kinds of qualifications should be made explicit.  
 Some issues more thoroughly
     discussed at European level are related to qualifications at EQF level 2–3
     – leaving qualifications of compulsory education and at EQF level 3-5 –
     including school leaving qualifications giving access to higher education
     and Master craftsman qualifications. 

According to the Lisbon Recognition Convention, school leaving
qualifications that give access to higher education are broadly
equivalent, giving access to higher education across Europe and beyond.
Relating these qualifications to different EQF levels suggests difference in
the level of learning outcomes achieved, which may present obstacles to the
mobility of school leavers wishing to access higher education in another
country.
In
some cases, national qualifications with the same name/title differ in content
and complexity. In other cases, countries have different interpretations of how
learning outcomes best fit an EQF level. These differences, even if legitimate, will not be understood by
people, for whom the title of the qualification remains similar and should
therefore represent a similar qualification. Exchanging
information and issuing guidance at European level should continue to aim for
making referencing decisions understood and trusted.

 The EQF’s design is fully
     compatible with the QF-EHEA. Coherence in implementation is ensured, in
     particular because the Council of Europe (CoE) participates in AG and NCP
     meetings and the Commission attends QF-EHEA meetings. This coherence has
     made it possible for most countries to carry out their EQF referencing and
     QF-EHEA self-certification in a single process, and to present a single
     report addressing the criteria of both processes. Several non-EQF Bologna countries have also developed lifelong learning NQFs based on learning outcomes.
     It would be useful to assess countries’ views on the added value of two
     overarching European qualifications frameworks.  

2.4 The EQF as a central tool for
recognising qualifications and ensuring transparency
The EQF relates to all levels and types of
qualifications. Coherence between the EQF and other European policies and tools[5]
that aim to improve the transparency of skills and qualifications (such as the
QF-EHEA, Europass, ECTS, ECVET, Directive 2005/36, ESCO, validation of informal
and non-formal learning) as well as quality assurance
frameworks and principles (EQAVET and ESG) is fundamental for their
effectiveness and impact. All of these facilitate the free movement of people
and promote lifelong learning, and some share the learning outcomes approach.
The EQF and European systems for credit
transfer and accumulation, namely the ECTS and the ECVET, are coherent in their
underlying principles, but not yet fully aligned in
their practical implementation. ECTS is used in around 75 % of higher education courses. While most programmes are now
described in terms of intended learning outcomes, the challenge is to extend
the learning outcomes to programme design and assessment. The on-going revision
of the ECTS guide will provide additional European guidance. The ECVET is fully based on learning outcomes, but it is at an earlier
stage of implementation.
The EQF’s common principles on quality
assurance are broadly compatible with European standards and guidelines (ESG),
and with the EQAVET. However, the principles of all three tools refer to
quality assurance in education and training in general only, and do not provide
specific guidance for ensuring the quality of the learning outcomes approach,
qualifications and qualifications frameworks. The on-going evaluations of the
EQF, EQAVET and the revision of the ESG should be used to identify where
further synergies between European qualifications frameworks and quality
assurance arrangements can be achieved.
The EQF is consistent with the Lisbon
Recognition Convention (LRC),[6] which facilitates the recognition of
qualifications in and access to higher education in Europe. The LRC’s
subsidiary text on the use of qualifications frameworks in the recognition of
foreign qualifications, adopted in June 2013 encourages closer links between
qualifications frameworks and qualifications recognition for further learning purposes.
However, recognition practices at institutional level rarely take into account
qualifications frameworks and the increased transparency brought by European
frameworks.
There is less coherence with the Directive on
the recognition of professional qualifications. The directive works with five
levels and input criteria such as course duration to recognise qualifications on
the labour market, while the EQF has eight levels based on learning outcomes.
This has caused uncertainty among stakeholders. Therefore, the new directive[7]
envisages synergies with the EQF. It keeps the five-level inputs system, but makes
it possible to set up ‘common training frameworks’ that enable countries to
agree on minimum levels of knowledge, skills and competences linked to EQF
levels. Based on this, countries will be able to automatically recognise
professional qualifications.
The recommendation envisages a close link with
Europass. The Europass supplements should refer to the corresponding EQF level,
but this is rarely the case due to the limited implementation of the second EQF
milestone.
Finally, there exist close links between the
development of the European multilingual Skills, Competences, Qualifications
and Occupations classification (ESCO) and the EQF. Qualifications that are
related to the EQF will be indirectly included in ESCO. This will be done via
the EQF portal, which will link to national qualifications databases. International
qualifications that are not included in NQFs will be directly included in ESCO.
The learning outcomes approach used in the EQF and ESCO should be coordinated.
2.5 Governance
The EQF is governed by the AG and NCPs (section
2.1).
The AG is composed of representatives of:
·        
36 countries (28 Member States, five candidate
countries, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland);
·        
European social partners (ETUC, BusinessEurope,
UAEPME, CEEP);
·        
European umbrella organisations that award
qualifications (Eurochambres, EUCIS-LLL, EUA); and 
·        
other stakeholders (Public Employment Services,
European Student Union, European Volunteer Centre, European Youth Forum). 
The CoE participates in the AG to ensure
coherence between the EQF and the QF-EHEA. 
Cedefop and the European Training Foundation
support the AG.
The AG provides effective guidance for national
referencing processes and builds trust and understanding among participating
countries. Its mandate was extended in 2012 to monitor the implementation of
the Council recommendation on the validation of non-formal and informal
learning[8]. This aims to
further strengthen links between qualifications frameworks and validation
arrangements, which are yet to be developed in most countries.
NCPs have been set up in 36 countries. They are
in various institutional settings, including ministries, national agencies,
national qualifications authorities, educational research institutions, and educational
information centres. Their effectiveness largely depends on how closely they are
linked to the national governance of the NQF/EQF process. NCPs focus most of
their activities on communicating with stakeholders, but they find it
challenging to liaise with social partners and lack expertise in communicating with
the broader public. National authorities should assess how the NCPs could
better communicate with a variety of stakeholders and
put in place communication strategies.
Although, NCPs have only used around 75 %
of their available budget in the past three years due to initial organisational
difficulties and changes to the referencing timetables, their activities were
considered pivotal to implementing the EQF at national level.
The EQF portal communicates about the EQF and
the results of the national referencing processes. It makes it possible to
compare national qualification levels to the EQF and to search on
qualifications. The comparison function shows information about nine out of the
20 countries that have referenced. Searching individual qualifications will
only be possible in late 2013. There is a significant
challenge in the fact that national qualifications databases do not yet exist
in all countries and that existing ones do not cover all qualifications in
NQFs. The portal needs a critical majority of countries
to participate so that its potential can be fully realised.
 2.6 Impact and sustainability
Although there are no statistics on the EQF’s impact on lifelong learning and mobility and its implementation is
at an early stage, shifting to the learning outcomes approach is a major
achievement. It has paved the way for more flexible learning pathways and the
validation of non-formal and informal learning.
The EQF has had impact beyond the 36
participating countries. Several EU Partnership countries adopted EQF concepts
for their own national and regional developments, and countries from other
regions of the world are seeking dialogue on the EQF.
Given the level of political commitment to the
EQF, the common reference tool would be sustainable
without European financial support, but stakeholders see that strong EU-level
coordination is a must for coherent and transparent implementation.
3.            conclusions
Findings confirm that the
EQF is widely accepted as a reference point for developing qualifications
frameworks, implementing the learning outcomes approach, and enhancing the
transparency and recognition of skills and competences. It could be central
within a future European Area of Skills and Qualifications. However,
implementation delays have created a sense of urgency. The EU should make it
possible for learners and workers to make their skills more visible no matter
where they acquired them. It must make the EQF fully operational as soon as
possible.
Based on the evaluation results, the Commission
suggests considering the following measures to enhance the relevance,
effectiveness and impact of the EQF:  
Accelerate EQF
referencing and developing national qualifications frameworks 
All countries should
develop strong NQFs that are understood and used by stakeholders. They should
build on national consultations, establish a broad
consensus on how national qualifications levels relate to the EQF and work
towards finalising their first referencing report by 2014.
Strengthen the
role and impact of qualifications frameworks based on learning outcomes at
national and European levels
Governments should
commit to using the learning outcomes approach in all education and training
sub-systems, by implementing comprehensive NQFs that include qualifications
awarded both within and outside of traditional formal education and training
systems. NQFs should be integrated into overall education, training and
employment policies. At European level, the
‘competence’ descriptor in Annexes I and II to the recommendation should be
clarified.
Enhance transparent and coherent EQF referencing, taking into
account the changing nature of qualifications systems 
Referencing should be seen as a continuous process, and should not
be limited to presenting one referencing report. The AG should provide guidance
on criteria 3 and 4 and develop a comprehensive strategy for following up
referencing reports in the future. This should include strengthened monitoring
of how countries take into account the AG’s comments on national referencing
reports and addressing referencing inconsistencies between countries. The AG
should also support communication among stakeholders on challenging referencing
issues.  
Strengthen the link
between European quality assurance and qualifications frameworks 
The
EQF’s common principles on quality assurance, EQAVET and the ESG should be made
more coherent and support the learning outcomes approach,
with a view to developing coherent quality assurance principles for lifelong
learning. Beyond increased trust in qualifications, qualifications frameworks
and referencing to the EQF, this could also lead to increased trust and better
permeability between education and training sub-systems.
Improve
communication on the EQF, to better reach out to learners, workers and  other stakeholders
and inform them about the EQF’s benefits
Having
referenced their qualifications to the EQF, countries should ensure that all
new certificates, diplomas and Europass supplements include a reference to the relevant
EQF level. Countries should set up national qualification databases/ registers
and connect these to the EQF portal. The EQF portal should be linked with the
European portal on learning opportunities (Ploteus) and ESCO. The Commission
will explore how web tools can be used to offer
skills-related services to learners, workers and other stakeholders, to support
mobility, lifelong learning and employability.
Make better use of the EQF in policies and tools for mobility and
lifelong learning 
The EQF can act as a hub to which other European policies and
tools, such as credit transfer and recognition, relate. Qualifications
frameworks and credit systems based on learning outcomes facilitate more
flexible individual learning paths in different institutions, sectors and
countries. The Commission, Member States and stakeholders should strengthen and
explain the links between the EQF and European credit transfer and accumulation
systems. Countries should increasingly use the EQF as an additional source of
information for the competent authorities examining the recognition of
qualifications issued in other Member States in the context of the Directive on
the Recognition of Professional Qualifications and in ET2020 countries in the
context of the Lisbon Recognition Convention.  
Clarify the EQF’s role
in relation to international qualifications and for countries and regions
outside Europe 
The EQF is increasingly
being used as a reference point for comparing qualifications. The existing
referencing process and its criteria should ensure that the EQF covers all
kinds of qualifications, including international qualifications. It should be
further explored how the EQF could support the comparison and recognition of
qualifications gained outside of Europe.
Develop the EQF to make it better adapted to current developments
in online learning and international qualifications
The EQF should cover international qualifications and qualifications
that include modules completed in different countries or that blend
face-to-face and online learning. The EQF can only become a truly
all-encompassing framework if it adapts to these new developments and remains
capable of keeping up with changes in the provision of education and training.
‘Rethinking Education’
emphasised education’s role in economic growth, competitiveness and employment.
One of its proposals concerns carrying out exploratory work on further
synergies between EU tools for transparency and recognition of skills and
qualifications. This should go towards building a European Area of Skills and
Qualifications in which everyone could move freely and have his/her competences
and qualifications quickly recognised for further learning and adequately
understood by employers.
The
Commission will discuss the conclusions presented in this report with relevant
stakeholders also during the public debate on the European Area of Skills and
Qualifications in winter 2013/2014. Based on the conclusions of this debate and
an Impact Assessment, the Commission may consider proposing a revision of the
current legal basis of EQF — (2008/C 111/01) Recommendation 
of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008.
[1] http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/eqf_en.htm.
[2] COM(2012) 669 final.
[3] http://www.ehea.info/Uploads/qualification/QF-EHEA-May2005.pdf.
[4] http://ec.europa.eu/eqf/documentation_en.htm 
[5] http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/mobility_en.htm.
[6] ETS 165 —
Recognition Qualifications 1997 Higher Education in the European Region, 11.IV.1997.
[7] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52011PC0883:EN:NOT

[8] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:398:0001:0005:EN:PDF