EN.doc · Web viewRecipients: Ana Bacalu Project Manager, Ministry of Development, Public Works and Housing (Contracting Authority) Madlen Serban Director of National Centre for Technical

Recipients:

Ana BacaluProject Manager, Ministry of Development, Public Works and Housing (Contracting Authority)

Madlen SerbanDirector of National Centre for Technical and Vocational Education DevelopmentMinistry of Education and Research (Project Implementation Unit)

Date submitted:31 OCTOBER 2008

FINAL REPORTNOVEMBER 2008 (Duration: 1 NOVEMBER 2007 – 30

NOVEMBER 2008)

Project financed under PHARE Economic and Social Cohesion

sub-programme

Romania

Project Title: Technical Assistance for Institution Building of the TVET sector

PHARE TVET 2005/017-553.04.01.02.04.01.03

Consultant:

1

2

ACRONYMS

ACPART National Agency for Qualification in Higher Education for Partnership with Economic and Social Environment

ARACIP Romanian Agency for Quality Assurance in Pre-University Education

ARACIS Romanian Agency for Quality Assurance in Higher Education

BA Bachelor of Arts

CA Contracting Authority

CNEAA National Accreditation Agency

CQAF Common Quality Assurance Framework for VET in Europe

CVT Continuing Vocational Training

CVTS Continuing Vocational Training Survey

DL Distance Learning

EAQA European Association for Quality Assurance

ECVET European Credit Transfer System for Vocational Education and Training

ENQA European Network for Quality Assurance

EQF European Qualifications Framework

ERDF European Regional Development Fund

ESF European Social Fund

EU European Union

HE Higher Education

HEI Higher Education Institution

HRD Human Resource Development

ISCED International Standard Classification for Education

ICT Information & Communication Technology

IVET Initial Vocational Education and Training

KE Key Expert

LCD Local Curriculum Development

LEAP Local Education Action Plan

LM Labour Market

LMA Labour Market Analysis

LMS Labour Market Survey

MoERY Ministry of Education, Research and Youth

MoDPWH Ministry of Development, Public Works and Housing

MoLFEO Ministry of Labour, Family and Equal Opportunities

NAQ National Authority for Qualifications

3

NATB National Adult Training Board

NCDTVET National Centre for the Development of Technical Vocational Education and Training

NKE Non-Key Expert

ODL Open and Distance Learning

PIU Project Implementation Unit

QA Quality Assurance

REAP Regional Education Action Plan

RNFIL Recognition of Non/Informal Learning

SAP School Action Plan

SPP (TS) Training Standards (Standarde de Pregatire Profesionala)

STE Short Term Expert

TA Technical Assistance

TNA Training Needs Analysis

ToR Terms of Reference

TP Technical Proposal

TVET Technical Vocational Education and Training

VAT Value Added Tax

VET Vocational Education and Training

VLE Virtual Learning Environment

WYGI White Young Green International

4

CONTENTS

Page1 Project synopsis 11.1 Project objectives and purpose 11.2 Planned results 11.3 Project activities, outputs and results 21.4 Target groups 41.5 Modalities 4

2 Summary of project progress and results 52.1 Project administrative progress 52.2 Description of activities performed during the reporting period

and strategies for achieving objectives by the end of the project

9

ANNEXES1 Materials produced for Task 12 Materials produced for Task 23 Materials produced for Task 34 Materials produced for Task 45 Materials produced for Task 56 Materials produced for Task 67 Materials produced for Task 78 Materials produced for Task 89 Materials produced for Task 910 Materials produced for Task 1011 Materials produced for Task 1112 Materials produced for Task 12

APPENDICESA Activities completed B Training plan

Draft FINAL REPORT

1 Project synopsis

Project Title: TA for Institution Building in the TVET sector

Project No: RO 2005/017-553.04.01.02.04.01.03

Country: Romania

Starting date: 1 November 2007

End date: 30 November 2008

1.1 Project objectives and purpose

The objective of the project is:

To support the achievement of the overall objectives of the education policy in Romania, by contributing to the adjustment and improvement of the VET and HE sectors, through enhanced adaptability and employability of labour force at the regional and local level, greater coherence between the TVET and HE education offer and increased access and participation to vocational training.

The purpose of the project is:

To consolidate reviewed responsibilities, governance and accountability mechanisms in the provision of initial TVET and HE degrees, in line with the social and economic development;

To assist in the consolidation of a system ensuring equal chances for young people to obtain a relevant professional qualification corresponding to European standards through provision of TVET and HE which responds flexibly to the needs of each individual and contribute to economic development;

To strengthen the institutional capacity of schools, especially in rural areas, to educate and train graduates capable of contributing to the regeneration of their local economy.

1.2 Planned Results

Improved coherence of the TVET and HE qualifications, and increased relevance of these qualifications as against the requirements of the labour market;

Increased capability of the Romanian authorities and actors in designing integrated and coherent TVET and HE strategies and programmes;

Increased capacity of the relevant Romanian institutions in designing and implementing TVET and HE curricula and qualifications adapted to the labour market requirements. In meeting the project objectives and purpose, twelve tasks and associated outputs are envisaged.

E0895C October 2008TA for Institution Building in the TVET sector WYG International Ltd

6

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

1.3 Project activities, outputs and results

1.4 Project activities and task outputs for the whole of the project’s duration, consistent with those listed in the ToR, are summarised in Table 1 below:

Task Activity Outputs & Results

1 Review and update of labour market analyses

Eight updated labour market analyses; completed, see Annex 1

2 Review and update of the 8 REAPs

Revised methodology for updating the REAPs; completed, see Annex 2

Three training sessions of 2 days/session for 100 experts to be involved in the updating of the REAPS; completed, see Interim Report

Updated/improved REAPs; completed, see Annex 2

3

Elaboration of procedures and methodologies for credit transfer and recognition of non-formal and informal learning

Concept paper; completed, see 2.2 below Guidebook; completed, see Annex 3 At the request of the PIU, added training in respect

of school directors/deputies on how to plan for RNFIL and for teachers and maistru on4the approach to assessment. Completed, see Annex 3 – includes training materials and manual

4 Definition of 15 TVET “core” qualifications

Concept paper identifying, defining and describing the “core” qualifications; completed, see 2.2 below

Review of the descriptions of the 15 TVET “core qualifications” in order to assure the coherent definition of competences and an appropriate progression of trainees through the training levels; Completed, see Annex 4

Three training sessions of 3 days/session for 120 experts to be involved in the definition of the 15 “core” TVET qualifications; completed - see Interim Report for evaluation report, materials and participant details

5 Definition of 16 HE qualifications

Definition and description of 16 HE qualification profiles at level V, in economic sectors as recommended by REAPs or other forecasting/ planning instruments for HE and proposed to NAQ in view of validation; completed for 17 qualification profiles, see Annex 5

Sixteen training sessions of 2 days/session for 200 experts to be involved in the definition of the 16 HE qualification profiles. Completed - see Annex 5 for revaluation report, materials and participant details

6Development of draft curricula for the “core” qualifications

Three training sessions of 2 days/session for 100 experts to be involved in the update/improvement of the TVET curricula; completed

Draft curricula and curriculum auxiliaries for the defined qualifications; completed, see Annex 6

Training modules for “core” qualifications adapted for students with learning disabilities/special educational needs; completed, see Annex 6

Draft methodologies for revision, development and evaluation of learning materials; completed, see

PHARE: RO2005/017-553.04.01.02.04.01.03Institution Building in the TVET Sector

Page 7 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Task Activity Outputs & ResultsAnnex 6 for evaluation report, materials and participant details

7Development of draft curriculum auxiliaries/ learning packages

Four training sessions of 2 days/session for 150 experts to be involved in the elaboration of the 150 learning packages corresponding to the “core” qualifications; completed annex 7 for evaluation report, materials and participant details

150 learning packages; completed, see Annex 7 Draft guidebook for implementing the learning

packages in case of students with special educational needs; completed, see Annex 7

Four training for trainer’s sessions of 2 days/session for 100 teachers and foremen from the 50 rural schools covered by the project; completed - see Annex 7 for evaluation report, materials and participant details

8Revision and update of the distance education materials

One 2-days training session for 16 distance education coordinators to be involved in the revision of the distance education materials; completed - see Annex 8 for evaluation report, materials and participant details

Revised versions of the 15-guides/curriculum modules for developing distance education materials elaborated in the Phare 2003 programme, and of the 50 learning materials developed during Phare 2004 programme; completed, see Annex 8

Eight training sessions, of 2 days/session, for a total of 300* people from the 150 TVET schools, in using the distance education materials in their respective schools. completed - see Annex 8 for evaluation report, materials and participant details

*Increased from 150 people at the request of the PIU

9Revision and update of the quality assurance manuals and guidelines

Revised Quality Guidebook for Higher Education; completed, see Annex 9

Concept paper on QA and accreditation mechanisms for TVET and HE; completed, see 2.2 below

External monitoring visits carried out to the 150 TVET schools and the Universities comprising the 8 consortia; completed - see Annex 9 for visit reports

Five training sessions of 2 days/session for 150 people acting as quality assurance coordinators in the 150 TVET schools; completed, see Interim Report

One training session of 3 days for at least 24 people responsible for QA in each University of those included in the eight consortia. Completed; see Interim Report

10Training for enhancing the institutional capacity of Regional Consortia

Eight training sessions (one per region) of minimum 2 days/session for 100 people representing the regional consortia, in order to enhance the latter’s institutional capacity for coordinating HRD activities and projects at regional and local level. Completed- see Interim Report

11 Training for the schools and Universities’ staff in participative management

Twenty sessions in participative management and student centred teaching processes, having duration of 2 days/session for 420 people representing the 150 TVET schools and the 8 university consortia; completed; see Interim Report and Annex 11 for details


Page 8 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Task Activity Outputs & Results Four study visits of seven days duration each, for a

total of 76 participants, in EU member states and/or IPA/NP countries; completed; see Annex 11 for evaluative report

12Awareness activities and dissemination of project results

Development of strategy for information and communication; completed, see Annex 12 and 2.2 below

Two conferences of two days duration each for around 200 people; completed; see Interim Report and Annex 12

Three thematic seminars of 1 day each for 50 participants each; completed; see Annex 12 for materials and evaluation

Four thematic newsletters in English and Romanian; completed, see Annex 12 (and Interim Report for issue nr 1)

Constantly update TVET website during the project.; completed - updated

Note that:

section 2.2 below summarises by individual task number the final situation regarding progress in each task; in most cases this account is based on a revision of the initial paper contained in the Inception Report and details any subsequent change in approach.

Appendix A shows a summary of the timescale (duration) of activities completed; Appendix B is the final detailed draft of the revised Training Plan. These show that all training and other activity was completed, the vast majority on time.

1.5 Target groups

The main beneficiary of the TA is the Ministry of Education and Research. Secondary beneficiaries at the central level are:

Ministry of Education, Research and Youth; Central level institutions with role in the TVET field such as: the

NCDTVET; the NAQ /NATB; ARACIS; ARACIP; ACPART etc; MDPWH (as the Contracting Authority); Regional consortia and other local/regional structures of social

partnership in VET; The 150 schools targeted for assistance under this contract; The eight universities/university consortia; An additional number of 16 TVET schools acting as support

centres; The final beneficiaries are the students of the schools and

universities and their local communities.


Page 9 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

1.6 Modalities

The TA team has endeavoured to assist the PIU in meeting the objectives of the project. This has been realised through very close contacts between the TA team and the expert members of the PIU resulting in consensus on the objectives and contents of the extensive training and development programme, reported in this document.

2 Summary of project progress, results and recommendationsRecommendationsAll major task sections of this Report contain recommendations. The following list is a short summary; please refer to each task section for details.

Task1 There should be more coherent and systematic field

research forecasting future skill needs Further investigate graduate job insertion Further study to improve correlation among qualifications

2 Increase the engagement of social partners Enhance links between economic and social development

and education planning Creat better databases to measure REAP targets and

progress3 Reinforce links between schools and employers

Review the deployment of acceptable staff as assessors In reviewing competence-based assessment for certification,

further develop policy and supporting instruments 4 Further development of implementation strategies of The

Training Standards and the Curricula as strategic instrument renewing and developing vocational training

Efficient feedback mechanism to the educational authorities

in order to take adequate action on curriculum development or other supporting material

A thematic seminar held in Sinaia on 25 and 26 September

on the topic of Articulation, further recommended:

The need for qualifications with no dead ends and with identification of meeting points establishing vertical progression.

Investigating a tier of vocational learning parallel to that of

academic high school education, inhibiting opportunities for progression.

the need for a much greater dialogue between the TVET and HE sectors.

Ensuring that routes were accessible and suited to the needs of all learners, whether in formal institutions or the workplace; these should encourage professional development and be based on the philosophy of lifelong learning

5 Within continuing redefinition of higher education qualifications, further review the competencies required for


Page 10 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Masters level6 It is recommended that the SEN guide be updated regularly

to reflect current national and international best practice. It is recommended that current initiatives to mainstream

Special Educational Needs expertise are continued in future training programs.

Analyse if the Training Standards, Curricula and assessment methodologies prescribe the same kind of training and development of skills and competences besides knowledge

Development of good practice examples for training activities including practical training and distribution among the schools

Development of assessment methodologies especially for achieved skills and competences

7 A permanent system (possibly allied to the system for online materials development) be put in place to ensure that all materials distributed nationally achieve an acceptable standard.

8 The Online learning materials development guide should be reviewed and updated regularly to ensure that best practice and new innovations are reflected.

The distinction between paper based learning materials and online learning materials is weak. A far stronger viewpoint is that both are different stages of development of learning materials - with some learning materials (or parts of learning materials) more suited to one medium rather than the other. The project took this approach when working with teachers under tasks 7 and 8 and recommends it for future use.

9 Encourage further national discussion to ensure consistency of VET provision across different sections, regions and providers

Further develop consistency of KPIs Deepen the development of national databases for TVET

schools and other stakeholders Further develop opportunities for professional development

of teachers involved in key QA tasks10 Continue to build capacity of regional consortia by

maintaining and developing membership11 Develop a future training focus on integration, leading to a

point where teachers, students and school managers view active participation in all aspects of school (and eventually community) life as part of their institutional ethos.

2.1 Project administrative progress 2.1.1 Approvals of Non-Key Experts

Table 2 below gives an overview of the approved Non-Key Experts in the reporting period, broken down by Activity, letter of notification number and date, and name of experts.


Page 11 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT


Page 12 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Table 1: Approved Non-Key Experts – those appointed during the reporting period

Activity Number Name Days Lon no Date approvedActivity 1 Pop Carmen Loredana 60 Lon 6/26.02.08 26.02.08Activity 1 Luca Marcela Rodica 50 Lon 6/26.02.08 26.02.08Activity 1 Ciuca Vasilica 66 Lon 10/07.04.2008 07.04.2008Activity 1 Matei Aniela 50 Lon 10/07.04.2008 07.04.2008Activity 1 Militaru Eva 45 Lon 10/07.04.2008 07.04.2008Activity 1 Mocanu Cristina 98 Lon 10/07.04.2008 07.04.2008Activity 1 Pirciog Speranta 68 Lon 10/07.04.2008 07.04.2008Activity 1 Sanduleasa Bertha 45 Lon 10/07.04.2008 07.04.2008Activity 1 Zamfir Ana 98 Lon 10/07.04.2008 07.04.2008Activity 1 and 2 Platon Gabriela 50 Lon 5/26.02.08 26.02.08Activity 1,2 Claus Nue Moller 176 Lon 1/26.11.07 20.11.07Activity 3 John West* 132 Lon 2/12.12.07 08.01.08

Activity 3Katherine Mary Galloway 30 Lon 16/25.04.2008 25.04.2008

Activity 6 Maria Kovacs 32 Lon 12/09.04.2008 09.04.2008Activity 8 Gabriel Negrea 100 Lon 13/09.04.2009 09.04.2008Activity 9 QA Bratoi Elena 11 Lon 8/26.02.08 26.02.08Activity 9 QA Cretu Emiliea 63.5 Lon 8/26.02.08 26.02.08

Activity 9 QADiaconu Gabriela Mihela 130 Lon 8/26.02.08 26.02.08

Activity 9 QA Ionescu Florinela 62 Lon 8/26.02.08 26.02.08Activity 9 QA Lixandru Ruxandra 61.5 Lon 8/26.02.08 26.02.08Activity 9 QA Nitoi Leontina 59 Lon 8/26.02.08 26.02.08Activity 9 QA Pop Iuliana 64 Lon 8/26.02.08 26.02.08Activity 9 QA Trifu Adriana Hermina 51 Lon 8/26.02.08 26.02.08Activity 9 QA Seefeld Radu Teodor 66 Lon 8/26.02.08 26.02.08Activity 9 QA Kaposta Emerich 58 Lon 8/26.02.08 26.02.08Activity 9 QA in HE Ioan Ianos 20 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Lidia Niculita 20 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008


Page 13 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 9 QA in HE Stefan Oltean 23 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Mihai Voicu 20 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Ani Matei 23 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Iordan Petrescu 23 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Mircea Diaconu 33 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Lazar Vlasceanu 48 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Victor Manole 20 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Lucian Ion Medar 43 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Marius Bulgaru 40 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Gheorghe Solomon 20 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Mihai Coman 30 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008

Activity 9 QA in HE Adrian Liviu Ivan 23Lon 19/23.05.2008

23.05.2008

Activity 9 QA in HE Alexandru Tugui 23Lon 19/23.05.2008

23.05.2008

Activity 9 QA in HEMircea Horia Alamoreanu 30 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008

Activity 9 QA in HE Viorel Guliciuc 40 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Simona Lache 30 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Ioan Vasile Abrudan 23 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008Activity 10 Nichita Luminita 10 Lon 9/03.03.08 3.03.08Activity 10 Nedelcu Adriana 10 Lon 9/03.03.08 3.03.08Activity 10 Mihailescu Carmen 10 Lon 9/03.03.08 3.03.08Activity 10 Ionescu Florinela 10 Lon 9/03.03.08 3.03.08Activity 12 Marin Mihaela 100 Lon 7/26.02.08 26.02.08Activity 12 Decebal Tapliga 60 Lon 15/24.04.2008 24.04.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Ioan Ianos 20 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Lidia Niculita 20 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Stefan Oltean 23 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Mihai Voicu 20 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Ani Matei 23 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Iordan Petrescu 23 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008


Page 14 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 9 QA in HE Mircea Diaconu 33 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Lazar Vlasceanu 48 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Victor Manole 20 Lon 17/14.05.2008 14.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Lucian Ion Medar 43 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Marius Bulgaru 40 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Gheorghe Solomon 20 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Mihai Coman 30 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Adrian Liviu Ivan 23 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Alexandru Tugui 23 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008

Activity 9 QA in HEMircea Horia Alamoreanu 30 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008

Activity 9 QA in HE Viorel Guliciuc 40 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Simona Lache 30 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Ioan Vasile Abrudan 23 Lon 19/23.05.2008 23.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Mihai Korka 23 Lon 20/29.05.2008 29.05.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Razvan Zaharia 43 Lon 36/30.07.2008 30.07.2008Activity 11 Participative Management Giovanna Stanica 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008Activity 11 Participative Management Catalina Postovei 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008Activity 11 Participative Management Elvira Georgescu 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008Activity 11 Participative Management Cornelia Drinceanu 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008Activity 11 Participative Management Florentina Veres 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008


Page 15 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 11 Participative Management Felicia Beca 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008Activity 11 Participative Management Aurelia Buchman 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008Activity 11 Participative Management Nicoleta Butnariu 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008Activity 11 Participative Management Daniela Codreanu 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008Activity 11 Participative Management

Ariana Stanca Vacaretu 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008

Activity 11 Participative Management Irina Bejan 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008Activity 11 Participative Management

Mihaela Constantinescu 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008

Activity 11 Participative Management Diana Ghergu 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008Activity 11 Participative Management George Razvan Marcu 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008Activity 11 Participative Management Catalin Petrescu 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008Activity 11 Participative Management Corina Popovici 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008


Page 16 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 11 Participative Management Ana Rus 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008Activity 11 Participative Management Cristina Tanislav 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008Activity 11 Participative Management Roxana Georgescu 20 Lon 26/16.06.2008 16.06.2008Activity 2 REAP Gabriel Hancean 12 Lon 25/16.06.2008 16.06.2008Activity 2 REAP Mihai Stanciu 12 Lon 21/09.06.2008 09.06.2008Activity 2 REAP Marian Chivu 12 Lon 21/09.06.2008 09.06.2008Activity 2 REAP Manuela Kadar 12 Lon 21/09.06.2008 09.06.2008Activity 2 REAP Daniela Rosca 12 Lon 21/09.06.2008 09.06.2008Activity 2 REAP Radu Cocean 12 Lon 21/09.06.2008 09.06.2008Activity 2 REAP Horatiu Soim 12 Lon 21/09.06.2008 09.06.2008Activity 2 REAP Mihail Minescu 12 Lon 21/09.06.2008 09.06.2008Activity 3 Informal nonformal Valentina Otulescu 50 Lon 23/09.06.2008 09.06.2008Activity 9 QA in HE Vlad Grigoras 10 Lon 28/07.07.2008 07.07.2008Activity 5 Daniela Tarniceriu 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Tecla Castelia Goras 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Tudor Petru Palade 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Luminita Doina State 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Victoria Stana Iordan 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Gheorghe Ivan 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Vasile Mircea Cristea 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Imre Lucaci Arpad 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Georgeta Voicu 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Ana Ispas 23 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Dragos Constantin 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008


Page 17 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

VasileActivity 5 Valentin Nita 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008

Activity 5Corina Adriana Dobocan 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008

Activity 5 Daniela Popescu 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Ion Blebea 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Steliana Toma 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Irina Lungu 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008

Activity 5Dumitru Teodor Dorin Mateescu 23 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008

Activity 5 Dumitru Bortun 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Dumitru Iacob 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Bogdan Bacanu 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Madalina Cocosatu 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Lucica Matei 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Marian Preda 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Adrian Nicolae Dan 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Doru Buzducea 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Darie Catalin Cristea 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Silviu Ciochina 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Teodor Petrescu 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Corneliu Burileanu 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Alexandru Boroiu 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Eugen Viorel Nicolae 18 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 5 Ionela Costica 54 Lon 29/09.07.2008 09.07.2008Activity 12 Emilian Burdusel 80 Lon 31/17.07.2008 17.07.2008Activity 1 Mihaela Lambru 20 Lon 32/23.07.2008 23.07.2008Activity 1 Luminita Nicolescu 30 Lon 32/23.07.2008 23.07.2008Activity 1 Cartina Cornel 34 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008Activity 1 Sufaru Ionela 34 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008


Page 18 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 1 Burcea Marin 34 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008Activity 1 Capros Mircea Petru 34 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008

Activity 1Cretoiu Vladimir Adrian 34 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008

Activity 1 Tone Teodora 34 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008

Activity 1Ancuta Romanescu Vasile 34 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008

Activity 1 Stoica Nica Augustin 34 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008Activity 1 Abraham Augustin 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008Activity 1 Preoteasa Bogdan 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008Activity 1 Hornescu Daniela 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008Activity 1 Olteanu Maria 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008Activity 1 Cartina Violeta 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008Activity 1 Cretoiu Adrian 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008Activity 1 Capros Anca Venera 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008Activity 1 Chindea Anuta 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008

Activity 1Olteanu Cristian Adrian 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008

Activity 1 Cazacu Cristina 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008

Activity 1Sandu Cristina Stefania 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008

Activity 1Ancuta Romanescu Doina 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008

Activity 1 Surian Doina Cristina 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008Activity 1 Buzila Georgiana 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008Activity 1 Olteanu laurentiu 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008Activity 1 Stoica Mihaela Corina 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008Activity 1 Burcea Nela Niculita 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008Activity 1 Chindea Nicolae 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008

Activity 1Ancuta Romanescu Razvan 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008


Page 19 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 1 Roman Ileana 30 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008

Activity 1Olteanu Teodor Alexandru 28 Lon 33/25.07.2008 25.07.2008

Activity 1 Chivu Marian 22 Lon 35/30.07.2008 30.07.2008Activity 1 Arghir Suzana 22 Lon 35/30.07.2008 30.07.2008Activity 1 Anghel Viorica 22 Lon 35/30.07.2008 30.07.2008

Activity 1Serbanescu Alina Magdalena 22 Lon 35/30.07.2008 30.07.2008

Activity 1 Serban Georgian 22 Lon 35/30.07.2008 30.07.2008

Activity 1Neacsu Mariana Luminita 22 Lon 35/30.07.2008 30.07.2008

Activity 1 Chivu Margareta 22 Lon 35/30.07.2008 30.07.2008Activity 1 Baltag Camelia 22 Lon 35/30.07.2008 30.07.2008Activity 1 Marginean Carmen 22 Lon 35/30.07.2008 30.07.2008Activity 1 Iliesi Teodor Valeriu 22 Lon 35/30.07.2008 30.07.2008Activity 12 Pasvante Adrian 60 Lon 37/01.08.2008 01.08.2008

Activity 8Codreanu Daniela Carmen 24 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008

Activity 8 Anghel Stelian 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Chivu Viorel 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Avram Emanuela 21 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Gherghe Corneliu 15 Lon38/18.08.2008 18,08,2008Activity 8 Stan Elena 15 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Tanislav Maria Cristina 15 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Baba Alexandru 15 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008

Activity 8Dumitrascu Gheorghe Catalin 18 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008

Activity 8 Draghici Liliana 16 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Brencea Mihaela 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Bunescu Mariana 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Croitoru Mihaela 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008


Page 20 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 8 Brumar Cristina 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008

Activity 8Pirghie Cornelia Iozefina 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008

Activity 8Dimoiu Luminita Daniela 21 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008

Activity 8 Dragan Claudia Andra 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Martinescu Gabriel 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Pop Iuliana 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Aleman Viorica 15 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008

Activity 8Stanica Giovanna Maria 24 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008

Activity 8 Constantin Gheorghe 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Lie Mirela 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Titel Dan 18 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Manescu Marius 15 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008

Activity 8Popovici Corina Virginia 24 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008

Activity 8 Hareza Lilian Mihai 20 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Iacob Mirela 15 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Muntean Vlad Dragos 15 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Kun Gabriela Florina 25 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Foit Ecaterina Daniela 16 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Filip Valentina 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activty 8 Neacsu Horatiu Dorin 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Georgescu Elvira 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008

Activity 8Gheorghita Delia Loredana 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008

Activity 8 Hrimiuc Corina Liliana 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Arpadi Radu 15 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Gradinaru Michaela 30 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Taralunga Marius 25 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008


Page 21 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

DanielActivity 8 Iotovici Bogdan Mircea 25 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Balasoiu Tatiana 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Dogaru Ileana 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008

Activity 8Majinescu Ileana Maria 10 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008

Activity 8 Pavelescu Simona 35 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Iancovici Wolf Miriana 5 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Melnic Alina 5 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 8 Osain Angela 5 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008

Activity 8Pavelescu Marian Stefan 5 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008

Activity 8 Baras Ciprian 18 Lon38/18.08.2008 18.08.2008Activity 6 Cazacu Remus 23 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Iordache Florin 23 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Lie Mirela 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20,08.2008Activity 6 Stanica Giovanna 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Cisman Amelia 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Acrivity 6 Caranas Camelia 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Stanculeanu Lucica 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6Olariu Lucretia Septimia 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6 Marinescu Patrita 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6Gheorghiu Tatiana Genoveva 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6 Raileanu Carmen 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Marica Mariana 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Hrabal Ileana Maria 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Balasoiu Tatiana 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Rafa Maria Adriana 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Stoica Elena Geanina 22 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008


Page 22 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 6 Ionica Maria 22 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Manolea Mihaela 14 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Iancu Lidia Ana 14 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Avram Maria 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Barbalau Georgeta 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Melnic Alina 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Osain Angela 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Hancea Gheorghe 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Rosu Consuela 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Stroe Doina 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6Cantacuzencu Elisabeta 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6 Chioseaua Vasile 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Chitu Ion 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Raducu Marcel 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Barlean Angela 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Cucean Maria 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Salal Maria 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Marginean Carmen 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Gaidos Nicoleta 22 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Sbora Eugenia 14 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Toma Liliana 14 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Vasiliev Maria 14 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Ciornei Alina 14 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Postovei Catalina 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Iliescu Rodica 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Ismail Nelida 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Costache Rodica 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Popescu Luminita 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Visan Carmen 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008


Page 23 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 6 Dinescu Mirela 12 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Brumar Constanta 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Dinca Cristian 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Otulescu Valentina 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Tanislav Cristina 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Negoianu Nicoleta 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Moisescu Tatar Mircea 5 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Stoica Anca 4 Lon40/20.08,2008 2008,2008

Activity 6Popescu Mariana Luminita 12 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6 Georgescu Antoaneta Roxana 3 Lon40/20.08,2008

Activity 6Jaber(Mocanu) Manuela 3 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6 Czira Agnes 3 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Deme Ildiko 3 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Len Rita 5 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Szekeres Jolan 3 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Bran Renate Liliana 3 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Hartau Cristian 3 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Marcean Crin 3 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Stanciu Marla 2 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Bucataru Mihaela 3 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Ilie Ioan 5 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Gabor Cornelia 5 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6Reissfeld Adriana Titina 4 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6Lobont Dorin Cristian 2 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6 Kiss Adriana 2 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Suciu Masca 2 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008


Page 24 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 6 Matei Elena 2 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Gorea Rodica 2 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Florea Maria 1 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Dragan Maria 1 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6Dobre Alegra Carleta 1 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6Caraghiaur Eugenia 1 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6Moldoveanu Olimpia Diana 7 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity6 Misaila Dinu 13 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6Ciulea Adela Cristina 8,5 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6 Streza Tinca 8,5 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Leca Aristitita 9 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Matei Monica 3 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Popa Elena 3 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Oproiu Ana 6,5 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6 Duculescu Antoaneta 6,5 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6 Murat Lemon 3 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Moisiu Maria 28 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Neacsu Felicia 8,5 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Chirita Eufrosina 13 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6Nichita Maria Luminita 8 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008

Activity 6 Branzaru Ioana 7 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Vieru Camelia 2,5 Lon40/20.08,2008 20.08.2008Activity 6 Tivadar Florentina 7 LoN48/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 6 Pescaru Ion 2 LoN48/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 6 Calen Florin 4 LoN48/11.11.2008 11.11.2008


Page 25 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 6Popescu Nicolae Sorin 4 LoN48/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 6 Năvodaru Laurenţiu 4Activity 6 Trifan Săucă 4Activity 4 Vieru Camelia 4,5 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Grozavu Camelia 14 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Ion Dana Ioana 7 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Petre Angela Maria 3 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Cuciurean Cristian 11 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4Gaspar Violeta Angela 3 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4 Apetroaie Ionela 13 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Pentilescu Maria 6 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Georgescu Elvira 8,5 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Tache Elisabeta 18 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Coza Adriana 9 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Brumar Cristina 21 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Vlad Ioana 9 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4Salomia Mihaela Mirela 4 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4 Dascalu Marea 3 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Micalacian Lucica 8 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Ionascu Maria 9 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Oprea Delia 18 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Dragos Daniela 9 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Rus Ana 10,5 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Neacsu Cristina 11,5 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4Vieru Socaciu Emilia Marcela 10,5 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4 Turean Silvia 10 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Zaharescu 9,5 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008


Page 26 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

MagdalenaActivity 4 Fratila Mariana 10 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4Varga Camelia Mariana 19 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4 Ravas Marilena 14 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Moisiu Simona 27 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Marinescu Iuliana 18 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4Butnariu Nicoleta Lavinia 12 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4 Andrei Maria 13 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Veres Florentina 9 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Stana Iuliana 18 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Zlatoianu Ioana 15 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Teodor Mihaela 16,5 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Tibrea Adriana 20,5 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4Socol Elena Carmen 12 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4Cismas Silvia Manuela 8 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4 Vrana Mircea 8 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Tanase Constanta 8 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Olteanu Matei 26 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Mangu Dumitru 12 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Zamfir Maria 8 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Mitrea Adagena 8 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4Ciobanu Mariana Violeta 29 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4 Dan Adriana 26 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Protopopescu Paul 7 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4Popescu Nicolae Sorin 10 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008


Page 27 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 4 Moruzan Dumitru 8 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Enachescu Mircea 8 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4Detesan Margareta Fulvia 2 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4 Jinaru Ruxandra 2 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Flueras Florin 2 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4Albu Geanina Simona 3 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4 Gebhardt Walter 5 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4Gebhardt Dianu Ruxandra 8 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008

Activity 4 Udma Florica 11,5 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Bucataru Mihaela 6 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Costea Georgeta 1,5 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Calinescu Carmen 1 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Simon Veronica 14 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Bucura Dana 14 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Cismas Calin 5 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Grigoras Gabriela 4 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Jurici Danita 1 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Dragan Lidia 2 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Cirin Florentina 2 LoN39/19.08.2008 19.08.2008Activity 4 Pescaru Ion 4

Activity 4Popescu Nicolae Sorin 4

692 Activity 1 Poliana Stefanescu 25 LoN43/01.10.2008 01.10.2008Activity 1 Ulrich Teichler 3 LoN44/01.10.2008 01.10.2008Activity 1 Suciu Alina Mihaela 20 LoN45/14.10.2008 14.10.2008

Activity 1Stanculescu Florina Aurelia 20 LoN45/14.10.2008 14.10.2008


Page 28 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 1Costea Carmen Elena 20 LoN45/14.10.2008 14.10.2008

Activity 1Mustata Mariana Iuliana 20 LoN45/14.10.2008 14.10.2008

Activity 1 Cristescu Rodica 20 LoN45/14.10.2008 14.10.2008Activity 1 Sandru Ioana 20 LoN45/14.10.2008 14.10.2008

Activity 1Sfarlogea Maria Alexandra 20 LoN45/14.10.2008 14.10.2008

Activity 1 Sima Angelica 20 LoN45/14.10.2008 14.10.2008

Activity 1Draghici Florentina Daniela 20 LoN45/14.10.2008 14.10.2008

Activity 1Florea Robert Florin 20 LoN45/14.10.2008 14.10.2008

Activity 1Calineci Marcela Clauida 20 LoN45/14.10.2008 14.10.2008

Activity 7 Trifu Adriana 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 7 Ionescu Florinela 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 7 Seefeld Radu 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 7 Cretu Emiliea 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 7 Bratoi Elena 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 7 Kaposta Emerich 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 7 Diaconu Gabriela 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 7 Pop Iuliana 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 7 Nitoi Leontina 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 7 Lixandru Ruxandra 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 7 Otulescu Valentina 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 7 Tanislav Cristina 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 7 Draghici Liliana 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 7Nichita Maria Luminita 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 7 Georgescu 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008


Page 29 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Antoaneta Roxana

Activity 7Stanica Giovanna Maria 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Amariei Maria 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Amariei Violeta 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Bilbor Daniela 10 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Catea Doina 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Deju Petru 8 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Donea Mihaela Catalina 15 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Fodor Doina 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Gica Rusu 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Gradinescu Izabela 21 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Irimia Dumitru 6 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Isaila Nadia 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Mihaila George 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Modan Nadia Elena 5 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Motoroiu Marcel 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Nistor Dorin 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Pentilescu Maria 8 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Plantos Gina 5 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Rotaru Florinel 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Savuc Costica 8 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Stanciu Tudor 12 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Tanase Claudia 8 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Vreme Gheorghe 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Alecu Simona 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Boanta Cornelia 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Bogdan Liviu 1 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Chivu Marian 12 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008


Page 30 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 2 Chivu Octavian 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Constantin Grigore 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Dinu Octavian Florin 1 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Gorciu Madalin 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Gurgu Alexandru 1 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Ichim Mitica 1 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Ivan Ionica 1 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Mihai Vasilica Gabriela 14 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Mihailov Luminita 6 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Mocanu Stela 1 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Mogos Gabriel 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Neagu Gabriela Carmen 14 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Ion Oana 1 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Ocneanu Lisaveta 8 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Paneoasu Margareta 8 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Putinei Magdalena 1 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Raicu Florian 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Roman Ion 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Stoica Cristiana 6 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Stroe Mihai 6 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Toma Constantin 1 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Turcu Mihaela Daniela 14 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Vaida Laura Fedra 1 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Zahariuc Tincuta 11 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Badea Corina 6 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Balica Alina 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008


Page 31 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 2 Calarasu Iulia 19 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2

Capatana Simionescu Ramona 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Cazacu Eugenia Mariana 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Costea Marian 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Decu Paul Valeriu 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Dinaci Daniela 9 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Dragan Marian 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Florescu Carmen 9 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Herea Doina 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Ionescu Dan Vasile 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Ionescu Ion 5 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Iote Carmen Adriana 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Manole Victoria 31 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Marinescu Eugen 1 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Moroianu Geaman Adrian Tudor 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Neagu Gabriela 16 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Pendiuc Gabriela 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Petre Vasile 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Popescu Constanta 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Popescu Mariana Luminita 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Radu Elena 15 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Rusu Gheorghe 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Serbanescu Elena 6 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Ardelean Ioan 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Babos Tiberiu 6 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008


Page 32 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 2 Ban Moisa 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Campean Alin 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Costache Rodica 12 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Custurea Doina 1 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Giurgiu Carmen Terezia 20 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Ianc Leontina 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Mielut Florian 15 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Mintas Ioan 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Serban Mircea 6 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Mitru Petre 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Petrea Viorel 6 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Pop Livia 12 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Popa Mariana 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Sibianu Simona 22 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Todea Dorel 1 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Unciu Speranta Dorina 11 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Zsejki Iuliu 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Balanean Radu 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Bong Vilmos 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Buslig Ana Maria 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Catana Savu 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Ileana Ciresica Daniela 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Garbea Ioan Petru 11 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Garcea Gratiela 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Giol Daniela Emilia 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Iordanescu Eugen 5 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Miron Tibisor 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008


Page 33 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

MarianActivity 2 Csaba Molnar 11 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Nagy Alexandru 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Nagy Gabor 5 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Octavian Bologa 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Pocanschi Mihai 12 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Popa Alexandra 18 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Popescu Marius 11 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Poplacean Adrian Ioan 11 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Puni Silviu Petru 5 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Racovitan Vasile Sorin 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Albu Ruxandra Gabriela 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Stetco Maria 11 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Tiberiu Fois 6 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Tomuta Silvestru 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Ursu Vasile 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Alecu Marilena 10 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Andrei Vasile Liviu 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Barbu Ionel 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Calota Ion 5 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Ciobanu Dumitru 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Ciortan Marinela 5 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Ciortan Mihai 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Dan Marius Laurentiu 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Dasoveanu Armand 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Demian Mihai 6 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008


Page 34 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 2 Diaconu Dan 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Dinu Cristina Mihaela 9 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Firicel Mariella 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Guianu Dumitru 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Iordache Nicolae 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Iorga Georgeta 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Jozsa Violeta 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Mandruleanu Constantin 2 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Micli Aglaia 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Ioan Valentin Mihalache 9 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Neacsu Cornelia 5 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Olteanu Costel 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Popescu Luminita Viorica Cristina 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Sandu Elena Daniela 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Schinderman Emilia 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Toma Mirela 8 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Treanta Sanda 5 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Basaraba Adrian Cosmin 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Vasile Virgil Borza 13 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Brancu Marcel 1 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Bufnea Mariana Daniela 24 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Cazan Carmen Marcela 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008


Page 35 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 2 Chiosa Ion 5 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Cioara Dana Luiza 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2David Laura Marcela 13 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Groapa Liviu 1 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Ion Iordache 7 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Maniu Izabela Carmen 2,5 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Mariciuc Adrian Marius 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Moldoveanu Marinela 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Munteanu Sorin 5 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Olariu Lucretia Septimia 2,5 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Socaciu Gabriel 1 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Truta Cristina 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Capota Valentina 21 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Cornaciu Ion 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 David Bianca 13 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Haidimoschi Aura 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Ioana Nicoleta Silvia 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Ionescu Mihaela Gabriela 5 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2Mangu Ramona Daniela 7 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008

Activity 2 Mitroi Elisabeta 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Sztojanov Istvan 4 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 2 Vadasz Levente 3 LoN46/31.10.2008 31.10.2008Activity 7 Tureac Anisoara 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008


Page 36 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 7 Livadaru Florica 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Bucur Roxana 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Patape Maria 14 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Stoian Carmen 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Neciu Ana 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Ciocarlan Stanca 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Albu Floarea 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Cojocaru Florea 10 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Campean Florica 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Erfulescu Dana Mioara 10 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Manzatu Nicoleta 14 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Stanca Margareta 5 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Buliga Cornelia 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Dascalu Marea 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Tudor Maria 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Serban Ana 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Gheorghe Oana 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Tanase Teodor Cristian 10 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Anton Petra 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Vasiloaica Eugenia 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Micli Aglaia 10 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Naiden Sanda 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Valeanu Ana 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Lungu Corneliu 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Litu Mariana 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Minciuna Carmen 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Orleschi Anca Cristina 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008


Page 37 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 7 Niculaiasa Crina 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Mustata Iuliana 5 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Mandrila Mariana 5 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Stefan Tincuta 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Vaja Daniela Ramona 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Teodor Violeta 5 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Cristea Ana Daniela 5 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Coman Mariana 5 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Gheorghiu Mihaela 5 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Dumitru Mihaela 5 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Drăghici Liliana 14 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Bojoga Mirela Gabi 7 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Pârghie Cornelia Jozefina 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Neacşu Gabriela 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Aleman Viorica 5,5 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Dimoiu Luminita Daniela 4,5 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Moise Leontina 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Mitea Silvia 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Zaharescu Nicoleta Diana 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Moldovan Codruta 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Diculescu Anca Loredana 5,5 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Drăguş Oana Veronica 5,5 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Grecu Mihaela 5,5 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Năforniţă Florina 5,5 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008


Page 38 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 7 Rus Daniela 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Filipescu Irina 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Bereşoaie Simona Maria 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Dinu Coca 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Micălăcian Lucia 13 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Sârb Ioan 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Zaharie Maria 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Vrasgyak Iuliu 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Bochiş Carmen Adriana 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Cuciurean Alina Elena 11 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Eross Daniela Liliana 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Uriciuc Dorel Ioan 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Frunză Daniela 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Ionescu Ion 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Grigorescu Andrei 11 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Popescu Minodora Elena 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Munteanu Ecaterina Alunita 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Ionescu Elena 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Grînea Ruxandra Sorela 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Hrimiuc Corina Liliana 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Constantinescu Georgeta 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Butnaru Liliana 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008


Page 39 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 7 Otulescu Valentina 12 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Cosma Daniela Elena 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Bereczki Ioana 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Tanislav Cristina 14 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Georgescu Roxana 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Popescu Luminita 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Postovei Catalina 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Iliescu Rodica 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Negoianu Nicoleta 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Ismail Nelida 14 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Costache Rodica 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Visan Carmen 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Bucura Dana 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Dinescu Nicoleta Mirela 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Jaber Manuela 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Beca Felicia 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Moghiroiu Ana 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Cucea Ramona Georgeta 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Corlade Ionut 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Gheorghiu Florin 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Buchman Lia 14 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Marincescu Mihaela 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Ardelean Camelia 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Stanescu Daniela 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Manole Livia 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Bertalan Luminita 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008


Page 40 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 7 Suseanu Claudia 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Ravas Marilena 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Tuca Mariana Silvia 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Varga Camelia 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Dubarca Nuta 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Ianc Georgeta 14 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Verdes Lacramioara 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Iliesiu Felicia 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Verdes Florentina 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Prelipceanu Monica Alexandrina 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Arendt Manuela 14 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Dumitrof Dorina 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Rizescu Marina Iulia 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Ionescu Camelia 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Gheorghe Carmen 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Berevoescu Luiza 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Tănase Constanţa 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Marincaş Luminiţa 12 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Cişmaş Manuela 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Zaharia Eugen 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Dan Adriana 10 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Moruzan Dumitru 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Mitrea Adagena 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Olteanu Matei 10 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Zamfir Maria 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Cazacu Remus 14 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Iordache Florin 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008


Page 41 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 7 Mozji Mihai 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Ardeleanu Elena Carmen 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Popa Virgil Vasile 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Ciobanu Mariana Violeta 14 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Calen Florin 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Lie Mirela 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Stănică Giovanna Maria 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Georgescu Otilia 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Oltean Nina 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Andrei Ilie 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Ivănescu Elena 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Gheaţă Carmen Liliana 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Gheorghe Maria 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Gheţu Camelia Carmen 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Mădularu Mihai 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Stănculeanu Lucica 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Arpadi Radu 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Baraş Ciprian Dorin 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Cişmaş Amelia 14 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Dănilă Cristina Daniela 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Bălăşoiu Tatiana 14 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Bălăşoiu Doiniţa 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Rafa Maria Adriana 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Andonie Silviu 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Pitic Aurelia 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008


Page 42 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 7 Streche Marian 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Săcăcian Dorina 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Giurgiuveanu angela Georgeta 8 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Melnic Alina 6 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Osain Angela 6 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Pavelescu Simona 6 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Stroe Doina 6 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Cartacuzencu Elisabeta 6 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Spiridon Daniela 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Cealâcu Isabela 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Hancea Gheorghe 6 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Bârsan Octavian 6 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Măniga Vasile 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Creţu Georgeta 6 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Manolea Mihaela 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Pîrvănescu Crenguţa 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Chichirău Ştefan 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Salai Maria 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Bârlean Angela 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Gaidoş Nicoleta 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Dan Eugenia 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Mărginean Carmen 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Bărbălău Georgeta 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Jiduc Gabriel 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Roşu Consuela 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Popovici Corina 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Dragomir Dorina 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008


Page 43 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Activity 7 Stanciu Valentin 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Irimia Floarea 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Niţă Raluca 3 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Ujfalvi Istvan 5 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Vulc Silvia 7 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7Zaharia Eugen Dumitru 4 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Activity 7 Chiţu Ion 12 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 7 Năvodaru Laurenţiu 2 LoN47/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 1 Popescu Andrei Ion 14 LoN49/11.11.2008 11.11.2008Activity 2 Dragna Tanase 10 LoN49/11.11.2008 11.11.2008

Subsequently amended to 102 days LoN 16/25.04.2008 - see 30-day contract for Katherine Galloway below


Page 44 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT


Page 45 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

2.1.2 Staff deployment/experts inputs utilization record

Table 2: Planned and actual KE and international non-KE deployment during reporting period 1 November 2007 – 30 November

2008

Key ExpertsInternational Key Experts

Planned Deployed by the end of the Project

1 Ian Hume+ 248 2482 Mie Poulsen 176 1763 Kerstin Schneider+ 162 1624 Robert (Ivan) Mykytyn+ 198 198

5 Peter Debreczeni1 29 295 William Callaway 147 1476 Patricia Georgieva 132 132

Total 1092 1092

Originally, 176 days for Peter Debreczeni; Addendum no. 1 on 26 March 2008 appointed William Calloway in his place for a total of 147 days. + Administrative Order no 2 of 07.11.2008 authorised a proposal for re-allocation of 14 working days between KE 3 (Kerstin Schneider) and KE1 (Ian Hume) and KE4 (Ivan Mykytyn); this increased the days for KE1 from 242 to 248 days, for KE4 from 190 to 198, and correspondingly reduced the number for KE3 from 176 to 162.

Table 3: Planned and actual national Non-KE deployment during reporting period To be updated

National Non-Key ExpertsPlannedoverall

Deployed by the end of the Project

Activity 1 2501Activity 2 1201Activity 3 142Activity 4 705Activity 5 640Activity 6 750Activity 7 1382Activity 8 815Activity 9 1206

Activity 10 40Activity 11 450Activity 12 160

Total 10.000


Page 46 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

A special category inside this last category of non key experts is represented by International non key whose detailed situation is in the following; they belong to the total of 10000 days.

Working days international Non-Key Experts

Planned Deployed by the end of the Project

1 Claus Nue Moller3 176 792 John West 1022 603 Katherine Galloway 30 24

Total 308 1632 Originally, 132 days, subsequently amended to 102 days LoN 16/25.04.2008 - see 30-day contract for Katherine Galloway below.3 Claus Nue Moller, who resigned on 15 April, has not been replaced.


Page 47 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

2.1.3 Incidentals budget

Table 5: Expenditure on training and development activities, printing and dissemination of events Data to be supplied later

Budget split for incidental expenditures 1 Euro %

NoProvision for incidental expenditure

Estimated units no(where

applicable)

Unit rate

EstimatedAmount

Situation to date

30.11.08

1 Travel costs and subsistence allowances for missions to be undertaken by the team experts as part of this contract, requiring an overnight stay away from the base of operations (the base of operation is considered Bucharest for all the key Experts, and must be defined at the beginning of each assignment for each mission for the non-key Experts)

2

Workshop and training programme costs (such as expenses related to conference room hiring, refreshments, trainees’ accommodation and meals, trainees’ transport to and from the location of the training session etc)

3

Costs related to the organisation of the study visits (transport, accommodation and daily allowances for the participants).

4

Costs incurred by the printing of necessary promotional/ training/ teaching & educational materialsTotal 990,000

1 The budget is indicative 2 According to the training programme prepared by TA with PIU3 Estimation made as result of previous experience in implementing similar size programme in terms of activities and participants** figure is indicative since most of expenses were not invoiced by contractors


Page 48 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

2.1.4 Addenda / administrative orders

During the reporting period Addendum 1/26.03.2008 was issued. The reason for the addendum was the resignation of Key Expert 5 due to unexpected family issues which made him unavailable to perform his tasks under the current project. The replacement person for the post of Key Expert 5 - William John Callaway – commenced work on 31 March 2008.

2.1.5 Other management and cross-cutting issues

Recruitment of Local and International STE

The selection procedures used by the TA to select the experts was transparent (project recruitment announcements were made in newspaper) and based on clear and objective criteria. Final decisions on recruitment were taken subject to endorsement by the Implementing Authority and approval by the Contracting AuthorityThe table above presents the list of approved local short-term experts. All days were contracted and deployed by the end of October.International Non–key STEs were recruited as required by project terms of reference.

Internal and external communication

To facilitate transparency as well as teamwork within the project, the following mechanisms were a feature of the project:

Weekly or bi-weekly meetings for the TA team of Key Experts (where needed including Non-Key Experts and support staff);

Frequent meetings of Key and Non-Key Experts with their direct counterparts in the PIU

Monthly monitoring meetings with the participation of PIU, contracting authority and other key stakeholders. These regular meetings with the PIU, primarily based upon the Monthly reports, are supplemented by interim ad hoc meetings.

Weekly meetings between the project team leader and team leader of the successor project

Other institutions with which the project has taken up contacts are: Regional consortia;

Schools and universities involved in the project.

Contacts with other donor-funded projects in the education sector have taken place on an ad hoc basis.


Page 49 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

2.2 Description of activities performed during the reporting period and strategies for achieving objectives by the end of the project

2.2.1 Task 1: Review and update of labour market analysesIndicator of achievement

Eight regional Labour Market Analyses have been updated and amended according to the priorities agreed.

Introduction

The Terms of Reference stipulate for Task 1 a review, and in the light of analysis of the labour market situation, evolution and requirements, an updating, completion and improvement of the eight analyses that have been elaborated by a previous technical assistance projects. A higher education perspective is to be included.The analyses should inform the update of Regional Education Action Plans, as well as the further development of the TVET and HE qualifications that will be carried out under this project. They should contain all the data and information needed to support policy decisions regarding vocational qualifications.Since the actual project had a special focus on the sustainability of results from the previous reform cycle of 2001-2003, and the first project under 2004-2006 second multiannual cycle, the specific results of PHARE 2005 were targeted at consolidating the impact of reforms and integrating the LMAs and planning frameworks of both TVET and HE. Therefore, Task 1 comprise combined activities for both the TVET and HE sector. The expected outcomes of the completed tasks are moreover measured in terms of continuing the capacity building

Background

In societal terms, the fundamental function of an effective TVET system is to provide the society which it serves with an employable, adaptable and mobile workforce capable of applying the skills required by a local and national labour market . In other words, to provide a demand-led system tailored to the needs of individuals and the labour market The development of demand-led education means identification of demand and Labour Market Analyses are related tools which can contribute to this process an latter on to planning for education. A mechanism has been designed and developed for a better correlation between the educational offer and the knowledge-based economy development needs, in the framework of ensuring economic and social cohesion by: A more comprehensive approach of the labour market needs, which takes into account the early training needs forecast; An integrated approach of the technical vocational education closely related to the strategic HR development plans at national, regional and local levels; A strategic approach of the vocational and technical education offer in a medium and long term perspective;


Page 50 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

An efficient involvement of the social partners in the development of the strategic “planning” mechanism; An integrated approach of the education and training levels, which includes the contribution of HE and TVET to regional development.

The process starts by the identification of the situation on the labour market by development and updating (annually) of some structured Labour Market Analyses targeting :

To provide an overview of the regional framework in terms of economic progress and demographic and labour market forecasts;

To analyse the vocational and technical education offer against the identified needs for change and the TVET capacity to adapt to such needs:

The tools needed to design strategies for analysing the dynamics in general should be consistent and coherent. The dynamics within labour market is a response to the economic environment. It is illusory to do studies of the labour market without understanding the economy, its potentials and the conditions which apply. Even more this can not be considered as an isolated island without understanding the position of the economy, its potentials and the conditions which apply within the European and world context. The Lisbon Strategy, adopted by the European Council in 2000, placed new emphasis on knowledge, education and training. The European Council set itself a new strategic goal for the upcoming decade: to become “the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion” (European Council 2000). This, in turn, requires a strategy which, among other things, supports the transition to a knowledge-based economy through

adapting Europe’s education and training systems to the demands of the knowledge society, making them ”a world quality reference by 2010” (European Council 2002)

ensuring “a substantial annual increase in per capita investment in human resources”

defining in a European framework those new basic skills that are to be provided through lifelong learning: IT skills, foreign languages, technological culture, entrepreneurship and social skills.

The Lisbon strategy has two main goals. The first is to enhance economic competitiveness through improvements in human capital.The second is to promote social inclusion. In the view of Lisbon, competitiveness should be achieved “with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion”, and not at the cost of greater inequality or social marginalisation. A dynamic and competitive economy should benefit all, and the entire European population must be involved in and benefit from reform and development. “The knowledge society” is a society of not only full employment but “all-employment” (Threlfall 2002). It is “an information society for all”--one in which “every citizen must be equipped with the skills needed to live and work”, where “info-exclusion” and illiteracy must be prevented, and where special attention is given to the disabled (European Council 2000).

Following the Conclusions of the Heads of State and Governments in Lisbon in 2000 and their endorsement of the common objectives for education and training in Europe in Barcelona, 2002, a radically new process of co-


Page 51 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

operation was launched in this area, with the overall objective of making education and training systems in Europe a world quality reference by 2010.

Ministers of education agreed on three major goals to be achieved by 2010, namely:

- to improve the quality and effectiveness of EU education and training systems;

- to ensure that they are accessible to all;- to open up education and training to the wider world.

The re-launched Lisbon strategy focuses on competitiveness, growth and productivity and strengthening social cohesion. Even more than in its first phase, the revised Lisbon strategy places strong emphasis on knowledge, innovation and the optimisation of human capital. The onus put on European education and training systems is immense. Investing in research, education and innovation play central roles in generating added value and contributing to the creation of more and better jobs. Education and training are seen as critical factors to develop EU’s long-term potential for competitiveness as well as for social cohesion.

Among the necessary reforms proposed under the Maastricht Communiqué on the Future Priorities of Enhanced European Cooperation in Vocational Education and Training ( December 2004) the “linking VET with the labour market requirements of the knowledge economy for a highly skilled workforce, and especially, due to the strong impact of demographic change, the upgrading and competence development of older workers”should be considered for the purpose of achieving social cohesion and increasing labour market participation.”

Negotiations through the Education Committee led to adoption of the joint report in February 2006 based on the 2005 national reports of the Member States and the acceding/candidate countries. It delivered a number of strong political messages to the European Spring Council of March 2006 in the context of its first review of the revised Lisbon strategy. These included:

Education and training are critical factors if the EU’s long-term potential for excellence, innovation and competitiveness, as well as for social cohesion, is to be sustained. The dual role – social and economic – of education and training therefore needs to be reaffirmed, as well as the need to ensure the development of high quality systems which are both efficient and equitable. There can be no trade-off between these two dimensions.

Education and training must be viewed as a priority for investment. The high returns it provides substantially outweigh the costs and reach far beyond 2010.

Reforms in education and training are moving forward, but more substantial efforts are required.

Investments, coupled with relevant quality assurance mechanisms, should be targeted on areas where economic returns and social outcomes are high.

Current Position (LMA development)

Decisions about regional/local strategies for VET and HE provision became more and more the responsibility of the stakeholders from the Regional Consortia/ Local Development Committees. The development of


Page 52 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

collaborative working arrangements between the key actors in the region or at local level is essential and the multiannual Phare IB projects contributed a lot to the actual capacity which exist in all regions/counties of Romania. They were provided with the necessary tools for the assessment of labour market needs to support development of educational strategies/plans. Through the decentralised model of Regional Consortia/ Local Development Committees it is possible, in a geographical location, to provide a framework for economic development data which describes the demographic profile of the region, identifying employers’ needs and the required vocational skills which will sustain people in employment and facilitate the employment of unemployed and low skilled people. Regional Consortia/Local Development Committees were established with an important support of MOERY through CNDIPT and agreed with regional /local institutions, authorities, universities and other partners such as social partners.

Under Phare 2004 project were developed a number of labour market analyses:

A comparative international benchmark analysis of Romanian based on key indicators from Eurostat;

A comparative inter-regional benchmark analysis of the 8 NUTS2 regions in Romania based mainly on official data<

Eight comparative intra-regional analysis of the 8 NUTS2 regions; Regional enterprise surveys regarding the short term expectations to

demand for qualified labour and experienced lack of qualified labour; Eight regional and 42 county labour market analysis based on

available statistics, administrative records and partial information on the regional and county labour market balance and educational offers;

One county (Galati) tracer study focusing on the ‘job insertion’ of graduates from the 2005-2006 academic year;

Testing of one national HE tracer study of the graduates from the 2005-2006 academic year

At the national level the main stakeholders are: Those concerned HRD aspects in the Ministry of Education and Research and in the Ministry of Labour.

At the regional level the main stakeholders are: Members of the regional consortia and institutions which are represented by those members

Task description

Most of the Labour Market Analysis methodologies and instruments were developed and piloted during previous projects and have been used in the development of existing regional/local strategies and plans for education. Task 1 aimed at consolidating these developments by a revision of reports of the different labour market analysis recommendations so to detect and propose the most feasible adjustments of the applied methodologies . Based on the preliminary review of the 2004 labour market analysis the following adjustments were recommended:

The comparative international, inter-regional and intra-regional should be integrated into the regional labour market analysis based on available statistical data and administrative records;


Page 53 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

A new methodology for enterprise surveys should be developed and piloted for Bucharest /Ilfov as the very specific region on one side and benefiting from previous projects of only one enterprise survey in 2004 Phare project.

A new methodology for TVET tracer study of the level 1 and 2 graduates

A new methodology for TVET tracer study of the level 3 graduates.

The TVET tracer study in Galati was proposed continued as follows:

o The PHARE 2004 tracer study in Galati (graduates from level 1 and 2 who did not continue their education) will be followed up by a tracer study of the 2007 graduates based on administrative records to those who did continue their education;

o Applying a new questionnaire based tracer study for the 2007 graduates from Galati, Bucharest and Iflov counties, who did not continue their education –on-the-field survey;

o Applying a questionnaire to the employers of the 2007 level 1 and 2 graduates from Bucharest and Iflov counties;

o Applying a questionnaire based tracer study of the 2008 graduates from the 3rd level in Galati –on-the-field survey

The HE tracer study methodology will be amended to fit to a national sector HE tracer study, which will be tested;

The rationale for the proposed activities was to: Continue activities which are well functioning; Test adjustments where feasible; Enhance cost-efficiency and sustainability of the labour market analysis

Task activities and strategy for completion

In the development of the eight regional Labour Market Analyses under the actual project the following steps were taken:

- Establish the working groups and responsibilities among the members of the regional consortia.

- Revise the guide/templates and training for the working groups in relation with activities which should be performed under the task.

- Gathering and updating of the data from Official Statistics, Administrative Sources (AJOFM, ISJ) and of Partial Information.

- Structure the information under headlines/templates and domains as required by REAPs

- Develop the analyses first on domains/subjects and than transversals among domains/subjects

- Develop the report of Labour Market Analyse per region as they are attached in Annex 1 of the report.

There are two aspects in relation to implementation of the task: 1. the close relation between task 1 and 2 in the project which determined that training activities to be performed in common and that the updated Manual for REAPs revision to comprise guidance in LMAs updating as well.


Page 54 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

2. the partial information as they were obtained and the new and revised methodologies for development of education related information were referring mainly to :

- implementation of an Employer Survey for Bucharest /Ilfov Region and related updated methodology.

- Carrying out of Tracer Studies Regarding Professional Insertion of TVET Graduates and related methodology

- development of a methodology for sectoral HE graduates tracer study

The strategy for Romanian educators in informing about labour market is drafted in the following .

Gathering and Updating of the Data from Administrative Sources (AJOFM, ISJ) and of Partial Information

It is essential that the activities from this task to be undertaken by representatives of Regional Consortia. The regional dimension of the analyses may only be attained by centralizing the data from the level of all counties. It is necessary that in each region to appoint coordinators to collect and process the county level data and representatives of AJOFM and respectively ISJ shall ensure data coordination, centralization and processing.Normally the period in which this action should be carried out is the beginning of the calendar year, in the months February - March, after completing by AJOFM and ISJ of their specific reports and statistical statements from the end of the year.

Development of Reports Regarding the Conclusions Drawn from the Update of the Data Obtained from Administrative Sources and Partial Information

The tasks for the development of such reports fall under the responsibility of the coordinators of the two types of institutions: AJOFM and ISJ. It is essential that in such reports the coordinators formulate conclusions and recommendations derived from data updated. The simple submission to RC of the tables with the updated data is not enough to facilitate analysis, debate and formulation of conclusions within RC. It is necessary that the group be guided by expert coordinators to those relevant aspects requiring construction and adoption of recommendations.The period recommended for drafting these reports is March, for the same reasons as presented above, to ensure completion of REAP depending on the calendar of specific activities of the educational system.

Update of Data from Official Statistical Sources (EUROSTAT, NIS)

It is necessary that the tasks for completing this activity be undertaken by several members of RC due to the quite large volume of data that need to be updated, analysed and construed. It is recommended to divide the tasks according to REAP chapters: demographics, economy, labour market, education. In order to update the data of each chapter, a work team with a single coordinator may be established. It is recommended that the coordinators have a good expertise in the respective domain. The update of the data also implies drafting a report highlighting conclusions and recommendations for REAP update.


Page 55 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

The period in which this action is to be performed is, like in the case of the data obtained from administrative sources, the beginning of the calendar year, the moment in which the data for last year are available in official statistical sources (i.e.: after the publication of the Romanian Statistical Yearbook)

Development of Reports Regarding the Conclusions Drawn following the Update of Data Obtained from Official Statistical Sources

The tasks for developing such reports are assigned to the coordinators to update the data specific to each chapter as they are proposed for REAPs. Formulation of conclusions and recommendations deriving from the data update by the coordinators is essential.The period in which this action is carried out is March.

Carrying out Surveys among Employers

This action, more than the previous ones requires a higher level of expertise and especially substantial funds. Under the circumstances in which it seems that the institutions represented in RC do not have the necessary institutional agreements or funds, the problem solving is mainly foreshadowed with two paths. The first, that is not within the reach of RC, is the one by which this task could be undertaken, by providing the necessary resources, at national level by the National Employment Agency (ANOFM) and assigned for implementation to its AJOFM territorial structures. Such an approach is logical and relevant taking into account the fact that AJOFM also has prerogatives for guiding and counselling different categories of active persons while knowledge of the labour market requirements by means of professional studies may prove beneficial.The second approach may be available to RC by developing and implementing some projects ESF financed, by assuming the role of applicant of an RC represented institution.It is recommended that the surveys be carried out biannually in September and March in any of the proposed solving variants or other variants that can be identified.

Carrying out studies Regarding Professional Insertion of Graduates from Administrative Sources (ISJ and AJOFM records)

This type of study has been piloted within the Phare TVET 2004 project in Galaţi County.The tasks for performing this activity are equally assigned to ISJ and AJOFM. These studies follow determination from the administrative point of view, of the aspects regarding TVET graduates by levels of qualification, qualifications/specializations in terms of number and shares of graduates who attend the next qualification level, who are employed, who are registered as unemployed. Such statistics may be carried out only by setting up a data base at the level of School Inspectorates including all the necessary personal data of graduates.

It must be mentioned that these studies based on administrative sources were necessary because of the lack of information provided by the on-the-field survey


Page 56 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

We should mention the fact that this data base is necessary also to investigate professional inclusion of graduates by means of on-the-field survey.The steps that should be followed in carrying out this activity are the following:1. Set up of the data base at ISJ level containing the number of students enrolled in the last year of School of Arts and Trades, Completion Year, Technological Highschool with direct route, Technological highschool with progressive route. The data base includes the information such as: name and surname, personal numerical code, address and telephone. The school unit, School of Arts and Trades/Completion year/Highschool direct route/Highschool progressive route, Vocational training domain/Profile, Qualification – period in which the data base is completed: May - June.2. Conclusion of the partnership agreement between ISJ and AJOFM to investigate professional insertion of graduates3. Completion of the data base previously set up by ISJ including information regarding graduates of the last study year with information regarding continuation of education – completion period of the data base: September4. Data base transfer (without name and surname) to AJOFM and completion of the data base information regarding: graduates registered as unemployed, employed graduates, graduates employed in positions according to the qualification acquired by education – the period for completing the data base: October-November5. Drafting of the study report based on the construal of data from the data base – period: December

In this application on-the-field survey should cover all TVET level 1,2 & 3 graduates. In these circumstances it is necessary to collect only the data regarding the TVET graduates by levels of qualification, qualifications/specializations in terms of number and share of graduates, who attend the next qualification level. This information should be included in the on-the-field survey reports.

The steps that should be followed in carrying out this activity are the following:1. Set up of data base at ISJ level with the number of students enrolled in the last year of study in the Schools of Arts and Trades, Completion Year, Technological Highschool with direct route, Technological Highschool with progressive route – the period for completing the data base: April, 2008.2. Completion of the data base previously set up by the ISJ including information regarding graduates of the last academic year with information regarding continuation of education – the completion period of the data base: April, 20083. Transfer of the data base (without name and surname) to AJOFM and completion of the data base to the institution which makes on-the field survey – period:May, 20084. Drafting of the study report based on the construal of data from the data base – period: May, 2008

Carrying out of Tracer Studies Regarding Professional Insertion of Graduates


Page 57 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Like in the case of the surveys carried out among employers, this action requires relevant expertise and substantial funds as well.In this case, the application of the long term methodology also implies either commitments of the central institutions or the involvement of RC and LCDSP to finance the activity from structural funds.

Presentation and Debate of the Study Regarding Professional Inclusion of Graduates and of the Surveys in RC

The surveys and tracer studies regarding professional inclusion of graduates have to be analysed within the Consortium in order to define conclusions and actions that will be planned as part of REAP.

They should be included under the umbrella of structured LMAs and discussed with the members of regional consortia.

Dissemination and sustainability strategies were implemented through the thematic seminar in June and the conferences in May and October during which the planning workshops and presentations enabled delegates to discuss the LMAs issues at hand and define recommendations for further developments.

Outcomes

The objective of the LMA component is to provide relevant and updated input to the TVET and HE regional planning process as featured in the REAP. As mentioned in the Technical Proposal the main challenge at this advanced stage is to make the LMA an integrated part of the planning process by strengthening the participatory planning process. This will means that the existing procedures and methods for collecting and compiling the data and transforming the input data to simple and understandable policy recommendations for the planning process are: Simplified; Targeted; Accepted; Digitalised as far as possible.

Experience shows that quantitative analysis alone is not sufficient to provide a balanced input to the education planning process. Qualitative data reflecting the contexts is also requiredThe objective was achieved through:

Identification of methodological barriers for stakeholder implementation;

Adjustment of methodology; Selection of experts; Training of experts; Supervised implementation

The project could only achieve the objectives of Task 1 in collaboration with CNDIPT and other relevant stakeholder, eg inspectorates and CAE.The activities were carried out between November 2007 and November 2008 during the life of the PHARE 2005 project.


Page 58 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Due to the specificity of the educational cycle with deadlines for REAP/LEAP to be completed by end March/April, 2008 and the need of LMAs prior this deadline it was requested that all task one activities to be completed by March 21st, 2008. LMAs based on statistical and administrative data stayed with this timetable but the supplementary LM investigation tools changed the calendar for some cases. The TVET and HE Tracer studies data collection can only be launched in early autumn 2008, when the 2008 students have graduated and decided on their career path. Because of this it was consequently recommended that the deadline for finalizing these activities to be postponed until mid November 2008.

Impact and recommendations

Regional stakeholders have the capacity to update the LMAs annually; The representatives of the Regional Consortia and the Local

Development Committees can evaluate the usefulness of the LMA’s enhanced as a toll for updating the REAP’s and LEAP’s compared to last years exercise;

Actions for a consolidation of the arrangements for data collection, maintenance and analysis at regional level are required. This will ensure that data can be collected, recorded and analysed regionally using a consistent methodology, that benchmarks can be established and that data and analysis can be easily accessed by a wider range of potential users with interest in the regional development .

There is a need for more coherent and systematic field research involving employers and employer organisations, using standardized instruments for detecting trends and tendencies in the labour market targeting forecast the future skill needs of the regions. Actions should be taken in this respect and sources of sustainable data development should be considered.

There is a need for development of a coherent and systematic research in investigating the graduates job insertion both TVET and HE using approved and standardized instruments. In this respect all actors with responsibilities in various stages of development should be taken on board, trained and stimulated to became owners of the process and results.

A research/investigation/study should be considered for development of the methods in improving the correlation among qualifications described by TVET system and the Classifications of Occupations in Romania.

Task 2: Review and update of the eight Regional Education Action Plans

Indicators of achievement:


Page 59 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

A revised methodology guideline for updating the Regional Action Plans (REAP);

100 Local Experts trained in utilising the revised guideline for updating the REAP;

Eight REAPs have been updated.

Task description and overall objectivesThe Terms of Reference stipulate for Task 2 review, and in the light of analysis of the labour market situation, evolution and requirements, an updating, completion and improvement of the eight Regional Education Action Plans that have been elaborated by a previous technical assistance projects. A higher education perspective is included.The labour market analyses delivered under task 1 should inform the update of Regional Education Action Plans, as well as the further development of the TVET and HE qualifications that will be carried out under this project. They should contain all the data and information needed to support policy decisions regarding vocational qualifications.Since the actual project had a special focus on the sustainability of results from the previous reform cycle of 2001-2003, and the first project under 2004-2006 second multiannual cycle, the specific results of PHARE 2005 were targeted at consolidating the impact of reforms and integrating the planning framework of both TVET and HE. Therefore, Task 2 comprise combined activities for both the TVET and HE sector. The expected outcomes of the completed tasks are moreover measured in terms of continuing the capacity building Current situationDecisions about regional/local strategies for VET and HE provision became more and more the responsibility of the stakeholders from the Regional Consortia/ Local Development Committees. The development of collaborative working arrangements between the key actors in the region or at local level is essential and the multiannual Phare IB projects contributed a lot to the actual capacity which exist in all regions/counties of Romania. They (Regional Consortia/ Local Development Committees) were provided with the necessary tools for the assessment of labour market needs to support development of educational strategies/plans. Through the decentralised model of Regional Consortia/ Local Development Committees it is possible, in a geographical location, to provide a framework for economic development data which describes the demographic profile of the region, identifying employers’ needs and the required vocational skills which will sustain people in employment and facilitate the employment of unemployed and low skilled people. Regional Consortia/Local Development Committees were established with an important support of MOERY through CNDIPT and agreed with regional /local institutions, authorities, universities and other partners such as social partners. The last Phare project enriched the composition of the Regional Consortia membership with social partners representatives and more universities involvement. The Lisbon Strategy, adopted by the European Council in 2000, placed new emphasis on knowledge, education and training setting a


Page 60 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

new strategic goal for the upcoming decade: to become “the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion”. The Lisbon strategy has two main goals. The first is to enhance economic competitiveness through improvements in human capital. The second is to promote social inclusion. Following the Conclusions of the Heads of State and Governments in Lisbon and their endorsement of the common objectives for education and training in Europe in 2002 Barcelona Council, a radically new process of co-operation was launched in this area, with the overall objective of making education and training systems in Europe a world quality reference by 2010.Ministers of education agreed on three major goals to be achieved by 2010, namely:

to improve the quality and effectiveness of EU education and training systems;

to ensure that they are accessible to all; to open up education and training to the wider world.

The re-launched Lisbon strategy focuses on competitiveness, growth and productivity and strengthening social cohesion. Even more than in its first phase, the revised Lisbon strategy places strong emphasis on knowledge, innovation and the optimisation of human capital. The onus put on European education and training systems is immense. Investing in research, education and innovation play central roles in generating added value and contributing to the creation of more and better jobs. Education and training are seen as critical factors to develop EU’s long-term potential for competitiveness as well as for social cohesion.Among the necessary reforms proposed under the Maastricht Communiqué on the Future Priorities of Enhanced European Cooperation in Vocational Education and Training ( December 2004) the “linking VET with the labour market requirements of the knowledge economy for a highly skilled workforce, and especially, due to the strong impact of demographic change, the upgrading and competence development of older workers” should be considered for the purpose of achieving social cohesion and increasing labour market participation.”Negotiations through the Education Committee led to adoption of the joint report in February 2006 which delivered a number of strong political messages to the European Spring Council of March 2006 in the context of its first review of the revised Lisbon strategy. These included:

Education and training are critical factors if the EU’s long-term potential for excellence, innovation and competitiveness, as well as for social cohesion, is to be sustained. The dual role – social and economic – of education and training therefore needs to be reaffirmed, as well as the need to ensure the development of high quality systems which are both efficient and equitable. There can be no trade-off between these two dimensions.

Education and training must be viewed as a priority for investment. The high returns it provides substantially outweigh the costs and reach far beyond 2010.


Page 61 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Reforms in education and training are moving forward, but more substantial efforts are required.

Investments, coupled with relevant quality assurance mechanisms, should be targeted on areas where economic returns and social outcomes are high.

A revision of the guidelines developed under the previous projects has taken place in the process to update the Manual for elaboration of REAP/ LEAP as Strategic Planning Documents. Discussions were held with the PIU Regional Coordinators on the first draft Manual and subject of their amendments of the document this was prepared to be presented and discussed with the trainees during the training seminars to come for the project. In March, two training sessions of two days each for 150 representatives of regional consortia /local development committees nominated to be involved in the updating process was held in Valea Prahovei. The evaluation report on the seminars in March 2008 is complete and copy of documents were introduced in the Interim Report .In July during the thematic seminar on planning a new session of training for monitoring and evaluation of REAP/LEAP was held in Sinaia. A revision of the Manual took place as well with a supplementary chapter referring to monitoring and evaluation of REAP/LEAP and their contribution as feedback in the planning process. In the period remaining up to the of October 2008 all REAPs were updated with chapter of HE included. The 1209 local expert days were allocated for local short term junior experts to deliver the task and write the updated REAPs.

Stakeholders, activities and means of achievement

At the national level the main stakeholders are: Those concerned HRD aspects in the Ministry of Education and

Research and in the Ministry of Labour, Ministry of Development Public Works and Housing .

At the regional level the main stakeholders are: Members of the regional consortia and institutions which are

represented by those members

The task has been delivered, with adjustments in terms of timetable. The remaining parts are mainly related to the translation into and from English of the documents delivered under the project as they were agreed with PIU ( e.g. one REAP , one LEAP and one SAP translated into English). They will be finalized up to the end of the actual contractThe task for this project is to:

Review and revise the methodology for updating the Regional Action Plans;

100 Local Experts trained in utilising the revised guideline for updating the REAP’s


Page 62 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Review and update the Regional Action Plans.

The objective of the updated REAPs is to facilitate the 2008 / 2009 academic year planning process on TVET and HE. The REAPs form the platform for the LEAPs and SAPs regarding the scope of intake by professions and educations. The REAPs are based on the regional LMAs, international and national priorities, strategies and trends, and input from the key stakeholders, especially the social partners and representatives of the life of work.In order to fulfil this objective the REAPs must: Focus on the demand for qualifications and competencies; Identify relevant national/regional/local trends; Provide clear and accepted recommendations for the scope of

intake of students by professions and educations; Provide guidelines for the distribution of the scope intake by

Judets.

An approach which combines a review and update of the plans already made ( within the previous TVET IB Projects) with further development of the tools for informing the revision process was considered to be the most effective. This approach has the advantage that the links between the initial stages in planning and the continuous revision as an on going process are reinforced continually and that there is less duplication of effort, particularly if a common layout is to be maintained for the plans. The process emphasized the need for continuous monitoring and evaluation of the plans as part of their development process. The scope for the workshops delivered under the actual project was to provide key stakeholders within the Regional Consortia with the necessary tools to the assessment of labour market needs, allowing them to find or define their future roles as participating actors within educational strategic planning and HRD strategic thinking improve the monitoring and evaluation processes as result of implementation and feedback the revision process . Furthermore, the workshop allowed for in-depth discussions of links between IVET, TVET, CVT, HEI and labour market aspects, including Lifelong Learning, all surrounded by the Umbrella-strategy mentioned above. The workshops/seminars programme included training of members of Regional Consortia in the use of the Labour Market Information and Statistics supplied during this project, informing them about the new guide developed during the project implementation and contributed to the development of their abilities to use the feedback from the monitoring process for the revisions of the plans . The workshops were relatively intense with Group Work sessions supplied with lectures from the instructors. The updated Manual on REAP /LEAP as Strategic Planning Document was created upon the existing guides for educational planning in Romania. The revised Manual was rewritten in a more accessible manner, with examples of judgements and useful instruments to ease the planning process. Monitoring and evaluation aspects were included in the Manual as key components of the strategic planning process because while the planning process helps identify the achievable objectives and the activities tobe carried out, the monitoring and evaluation process helps us identify whether the


Page 63 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

implementation process is goes accordingly and the results are satisfactory to reach the objectives proposed by planning. The actual Manual is used as a platform for a description of the report outline for REAP and LEAP, and the related monitoring aspects and reports. We assumed that the methodology for revision and improving the planning process within the educational system should be based on the previous guides and manuals developed on topic and on the assessment of the existing capacity inside the structures involved in the planning process.

The new guide follow the framework for design of Human Resource strategies .The need for a consistent framework ,make us consider that it is a necessity for a broader guide. Additional comments and descriptions were inserted, not least in matters of the overall Log-Frame approach (recommended by EU) but a completed description of Monitoring and Evaluation, including aspects on performance indicators.In our approach we proposed consultation on the new Manual with actors involved in planning process; the attached Manual in Annex 2 of the report is the final version as result of consultation process.

Re: T.2.1 Revised methodology for guideline for updating the Regional Action Plans (REAP)

The activity included the following sub-activities:a) Identification of sections in the current methodology which need to be

revised in order to increase clarity and to aid implementation and focus of the task. This identification will be done at a workshop for selected RC and LC members covering mainly agricultural, industrial and service sector dominated regions.

b) Elaboration of revised method of updating the existing REAP’s, taking into account the scarce resources of the stakeholders’ and the input provided by the stakeholders’;

Re: T.2.2 Training of local experts: 100 Local Experts trained in utilising the revised guideline for updating the REAP;

a) Design of a training course for local experts in updating the REAP’s;b) Selection of 150 local experts – primarily from the RC's, LDC's, TVET or

HE institutions or regional development agencies - to implement the updating of the REAP’s.

c) Two training sessions of two days for a total of 100 local experts involved in updating the REAP’s;

d) Training prepared and delivered on subject of monitoring and evaluation during the thematic seminar on planning in July .

Re T.2.3 Implementation of updating of 8 REAP’s:a) Assistance to RC’s in updating the REAP’s;b) Feed-back on the REAP’s elaborated by the RC;

Re T.2.4 Implementation of updated LEAP’s:a) Assistance to the LDC’s in updating the LEAP’s;

During implementation, the TA focused on the following aspects regarding Task 2: Revision of the methodology;


Page 64 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Training . Support REARs revision

The training of local experts:

a) Design of a training course for local experts in updating the REAPs;

b) Selection of 150 local experts ( supplementary 50) – primarily from the RCs, LDCs, representing TVET / HE institutions – responsible with the updating of the REAPs;

c) Deliver two training sessions of two days for a total of 150 local experts involved in updating the REAPs.

The two training sessions were carried out in Sinaia during March/April 2008.Another training session on REAPs/LEAPs dedicated to the monitoring process and use of the results in revision for the plans, was held in Sinaia in 17/18 July during the thematic eminar. The training materials are attached in annex 2, together with Manual and the eight REAPs.

Outcomes, indicators of achievement and impact

The task for this project is to:

Review and revise the methodology for updating the Regional Action Plans;

Training the the RCs, LDCs, representing TVET / HE institutions – responsible with the updating of the REAPs/LEAPs.

Review and update the Regional Action Plans.

The actual outcomes, as required, have been: A revised methodology guideline for updating the Regional Action Plans

(REAP’s); Planed 150 Local Experts trained in utilising the revised guideline for

updating the REAP’s;. Eight REAP’s has been updated,

The means of achievement were Identification of methodological barriers for transforming LMA results

and other inputs into relevant, focused and high quality REAP’s;

Adjustment of methodology; Selection of experts; Training of experts; Supervised implementation

And the impact has been: Regional stakeholders will have the capacity to update the REAP’s

annually; Monitoring visits and reports will be produced annually


Page 65 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

RecommendationsThere are some recommendations which we think should be in the attention for stakeholder in periods to come :

The concept and exercise of planning for education at the regional and local level is still young and our assessment is that the consortia/ and local development committees still need time to develop a cohesive and effective way of working together and to embed this collaborative approach. Happen before and is probable to happen in the future that new membership and adjustment will take place for the regional consortia in special. From time to time they will need further briefing and updating in order to support their development as bodies capable to access finances for the actions proposed in the REAPs/LEAPs.

There is still need to increase the engagement of social partners representatives (in special employers representatives) in the planning for education process and a secured approach to guarantee that the outcomes are not dominated by public sector organisations and by the supply side. The importance of social partners involvement is recognised and achieved the inclusion of social partners as members of the consortia, the training and their involving in planning was realized. But, we still think that is needed the development of effective mechanisms to increase their involvement in terms in contributing in generate forecasts of future skill needed regionally/locally. A development of common European financed projects could be an instrument of direct involvement of employers in educational matters at regional level.

The development of REAPs would benefit from closer links between planning for economic and social development and planning for education and training. Clear articulation of the overall economic and social development plans of each region in the longer term is vital to long-term planning for TVET. Increasing input from the higher education sector in regions with a view to linking VET development beyond level 3 and to improving the relevance of initial teacher training for TVET.

Careful monitoring and evaluation of the implementation and achievement of the REAP objectives, targets and actions should be performed systematically and clear reports should feed back the revision process of plans. This will secure that an integrated planning system is operating effectively. Certain elements should be considered right from the plan development phase as being extremely important : the need for setting up clear measurable objectives, including the creation of a data base necessary to measure progress in achieving such objectives.


Page 66 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

12. TIMETABLE OF ACHIEVEMENT

Item No.

Action Period Institutions represented in RC involved

1 Establishment of responsibilities and calendar for updating and monitoring/evaluating REAP within RC

September AJOFM (RC chairmanship) + CSI (RC secretary office)

2 Collecting and updating data from administrative sources (AJOFM, CSI) and of partial information

February - March

All AJOFM and CSICoordination ensured by one AJOFM and one CSI

3 Development of reports regarding the conclusions drawn following update of data obtained from administrative sources

March AJOFM (RC chairmanship) and CSI (CR secretary office)

4 Update of data from official statistical sources (EUROSTAT, NIS).

February-March

3 -4 members of RC by REAP domains

5 Development of reports regarding the conclusions drawn following the update of the data from official statistical sources

March 3 - 4 members of RC by REAP domains

6 Carrying out of surveys among employers

Biannually: September,March

7 Presentation, debate and validation of reports during a CR meeting

March-April

8 Carrying out of the study regarding professional inclusion of the graduates from administrative sources (CSI and AJOFM records)

June-October All AJOFM and CSICoordination ensured by one CSI


Page 67 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

9 Presentation and debate of the study regarding professional insertion of graduates from administrative sources in RC

December

10 Carrying out of tracer studies regarding professional insertion of graduates

6 months after graduation (November - December)12 and 36 months after graduation (June - July)

11 Presentation and debate of the study regarding professional insertion of graduates from administrative sources in RC and of the surveys

December

12 Drafting of the reports for REAP and LEAP monitoring and evaluation

January-February

2 members of the RC for each LEAP

13 Validation of the monitoring reports by CR

March

14 Developing of the first draft for the updated REAP

March-April REAP Development team: 3 - 5 RC members

15 Consultation process of RC, LCDSP members, school units and other stakeholders

April-May AJOFM (RC chairmanship)

16 Corrections of REAP following the consultation process

May REAP development team: 3-5 RC members

17 Adoption of REAP by the RC

May AJOFM (RC chairmanship)CSI (RC secretariat)

18 Submission of REAP May AJOFM (RC


Page 68 of 161

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

to CDR for approval chairmanship) + RDA

19 REAP approved by CDR

June


Page 69 of 161

FINAL REPORT Page 70

Task 3: Elaboration of procedures and methodologies for credit transfer and recognition of non-formal and informal learning

Task description and overall objectives

To produce the regularly updated concept paper stating the effects of the school system of current methodologies elaborate by the Technical secretariat of the NATB for approval of centres organising validation of non-formal and informal learning;

To produce a guidebook for national use of the VET schools to explain and formulate essentials in credit transfer and recognition of competences based on ECVET;

At the request of the PIU, to draw up a training plan in respect of (and subsequently to train) school directors/deputies on how to plan for RNFIL and for teachers and maistru on the approach to assessment; three training sessions are envisaged.

IntroductionThis section reports on the production of a ‘concept paper’ on the recognition of non-formal and informal learning and the production of a ‘guidebook’ to inform schools about the essentials of credit transfer.The section: gives some international concepts and context which formed the consultants’ starting point;

explains how these were refined or adapted to form a plan of action for the project, in consultation with the Romanian authorities;

reports the main products or activities relevant to the topic which were undertaken in the course of the project;

makes some observations about the future evolution of the Romanian system with respect to these topics.

Recognition of Non-formal and informal learning (RNFIL)

Current international concepts and context

The idea of RNFIL is an unstable one, due to different definitions both of what ‘recognition’ means and what constitutes non-formal and informal learning. A useful distinction is made (Werquin: 2007)1 between technical recognition (official, formal, usually involving the award of a certificate), and social recognition (bringing actual rewards in the labour market, access to further training or other forms of status in society). While one hopes that technical recognition will lead to social recognition, it is possible both to have social recognition of learning without technical recognition (e.g. an employer promotes a worker who has learned a lot from experience), and to have

1 this and later definitions concerning RNFIL are taken from Patrick Werquin’s papers to the October 2007 Vienna conference of OECD concerning their current activity on RNFIL. They are work in progress and the definitions are liable to change in the light of discussions between participating countries.

E0895C November 2008TA for Institution Building in the TVET sector WYG International Ltd


technical recognition without social recognition (e.g. an official qualification which is worthless in practice). However it was clear from the start of the project that we were dealing with technical recognition (ie. certification); it was recognized that social recognition is not something which can be achieved through methodologies and documents, though clearly it is hoped in the Romanian context (where bearing the correct ‘papers’ can be important in the labour market), that technical recognition would lead to social recognition.In the context of RNFIL we also need to have a common understanding of the ideas of non-formal and informal learning. As Werquin (2007) has shown the definitions of these terms given by various sources are varied, and have changed over time. While the idea of informal learning as unintended, and acquired through the natural processes of work and social life, is fairly well identified, the idea of non-formal learning is not settled. At one extreme CEDEFOP2 have proposed that it should include only intentional and planned activities which have no explicit learning outcomes – a rather difficult and highly specialized concept. At the other extreme ISCED 97 defines non-formal education as any organized activities which lie outside the regular initial, higher education or apprenticeship systems; thus this would include virtually all of adult education and training, whether taking place in educational institutions or not. In the context of the project we have taken what appears to be the working definition of non-formal learning in Romania (and in many other countries visited as part of the OECD project) as encompassing any organized education or training which takes place in identifiable centres which are not recognized educational institutions or which takes place in educational institutions, but not as part of their normal regular programmes. Thus it includes training taking place in dedicated centres run by employers, by NGOs and private training providers, whether for young people or adults. It would also include, for example, special programmes run by schools for adults or young drop-outs, or extra-mural programmes organized by Universities. This is close to the idea of non-formal learning taking place ‘alongside mainstream education’ given in the EC Memorandum on Lifelong Learning.3

Although RNFIL practices of one kind or another have existed for many years,4 there has been a recent trend for international organizations to explore and promote this type of certification. In their recommendation of 23rd April 2008 which introduced the European Qualifications Framework, the Council and Parliament of the EU asked countries “to promote the validation of non-formal and informal learning”, and support of the development and operation of RNFIL is an eligible activity under the ESF. During 2006-8 the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development has undertaken a major activity comparing the approach of different countries with some 25 countries taking an active part. It has to be said, though, that policy seems to be considerably in advance of practice – the OECD activity has not uncovered many examples of countries where RNFIL systems have moved beyond the experimental phase into large scale regular delivery, with the exception perhaps of ‘second chance’ school leaving diplomas equating to general primary (and sometimes secondary) education. In the vocational

2Terminology of Education and Training Policy, Tissot P. (ed.), CEDEFOP, forthcoming3 Commission Staff Working Paper, SEC(2000) 18324 Certainly since the 1970s the US General Education Diploma has provided a means for school drop-outs to gain the equivalent of a High School Diploma. In the UK the NVQs of the late 1980s were explicitly designed to allow them to be gained through RNFIL, and Access to Higher Education programmes from the same era allowed non-conventional admission to Universities.



sphere RNFIL is relatively small scale in most countries, though is increasingly actively promoted.5

Internationally, typical reasons for promoting RNFIL is that it will bring benefits of:- encouraging people to undertake a wide variety of learning, at work, at home and through courses in a wide variety of organizations since they will have the prospect of formal recognition (through the award of qualifications) for such learning;- easing the operation of the labour market since more people will have transparent and trusted certificates, thus making the hiring and allocation of labour easier for employers;- providing natural justice and inclusion for those who have – for whatever reason – missed out on ‘mainstream’ formal schooling. Perhaps because they have dropped out, or did not have the chance to complete, or because they felt alienated from the culturally dominant curriculum.

It must be said that there is little by way of objective evidence that these supposed benefits actually occur, and the OECD work has found some practical problems in operating RNFIL in a number of countries, including: cost; procedures for the establishment of prior learning and assessment of achievement are costly, as they need to be tailored to each individual;

technical reasons to do with the structure of qualifications; it is not always easy to grant exemptions from regular qualification courses even where partial achievement has been clearly demonstrated through RNFIL;

social recognition; even where RNFIL has been successfully applied, it is not necessarily the case that a successful candidate enjoys the same prestige as someone who has gained the same qualification through regular methods.

Application and adaptation for the project

Romania has established procedures for RNFIL, operated under the regulation of the Consiliul National de Formare Profesionala a Adultilor – CNFPA. These concern vocational qualifications only, and do not form the basis for admission to higher education. However, like the British NVQs, the Romanian qualifications intended for adult vocational training have from the start been designed with a view to their being able to be awarded through RNFIL as well as through standard training programmes.In this respect it may be reasonably claimed that Romania is probably towards the forefront of international practice in RNFIL. There are more than 40 centres authorized by CNFPA and the numbers are growing; this programme is no longer in an experimental stage and looks to be sustainable as part of the national qualifications system. The availability of ESF monies to support these centres has, of course, been helpful, but it appears to the consultants that a combination of: adult qualifications designed to accommodate RNFIL;

sensible, practical guidance and requirements for accreditation;

a culture where official qualifications are valued, while there is an acceptance that significant numbers of people have undocumented skills through no fault of their own;

5 The expert concerned with RNFIL in this project was, concurrently, involved in the OECD activity.



have all combined in Romania to produce a climate where RNFIL may prove durable in the longer term.

It was clear from early conversations with the CNDIPT that what was wanted was not new approaches to RNFIL, or any adaptation of RNFIL procedures to mesh in with the established qualifications system for young people, but rather an exercise to assist vocational schools in satisfying the existing CNFPA requirements for accreditation.6

The CNDIPT aims in encouraging schools down this path were multiple: in order to place them in a central position of offering a variety of VET functions within their communities;

to aid them to diversify into adult training in view of the falling roles of young people due to demographic trends;

to build up capacity within schools to undertake competence-based assessment.

The last motivation was significant. The desire to establish and enhance competence-based assessment is by no means only to do with the offering of certification to adults. The perception of the CNDIPT is that – despite having a modular VET system for young people and explicit learning outcomes for all programmes – the schools are weak at assessing competences during the programmes, and over-reliant on the final exam procedures. This, in the CNDIPT view, means that any partial qualification (unit certificate) would be of dubious quality, militating against a robust system of credit transfer (see next section). More robust competence-based assessment would also be key to implementing a proposed plan to require a final sustained period of work experience for Level 2 vocational students, which would require procedures to ensure that the outcomes of this work experience were validated and reflected in final certificates.In view of these requirements it was decided to make what the Terms of Reference described as a ‘Concept Paper’ more in the form of a fairly practical guide for schools intending to become an Evaluation Centre, complementing, but not over-riding, the CNFPA requirements. It was also jointly agreed to introduce an element of training/briefing for a small group of pilot schools which was not envisaged in the Terms of Reference.

Main products and activities

It was clearly important to understand the CNFPA requirements which formed the centrepiece of the activity. Helpful meetings were held with the relevant CNFPA staff to clarify areas of doubt.At the start of the project the consultants were unclear about the current practices of schools in conducting competence-based assessment, and a series of school visits were made in Bucharest to gain an impression of this. As will be discussed in the final section, this still remains an area of some doubt – schools, and teachers within them, certainly reported that they undertook individualized assessment of students with respect to each unit of the training standards; some documentation showing records of these

6 at the time it was not thought that any schools were acting as accredited Evaluation Centres (Center de Evaluare si Certificare a Competentelor Profesionale). During fieldwork it transpired that one had been accredited, though its experience had not been without problems and this school decided to ‘rejoin’ the selection of schools brought within scope of the project.



assessments was also presented to the consultants. Moreover during training events school directors did not envisage any great difficulties in developing the assessment instruments needed to act as an Evaluation Centre. The CNDIPT, however, were far more sceptical about capabilities within the system. It is likely that the schools visited were amongst the most advanced in the development of ‘modern’ methods generally, and it was also the case that the consultants did not undertake a detailed and critical review of practice. Nevertheless there are very different accounts of what current practice actually is, which will be important to resolve one way or another before any more widespread development of competence-based assessment is undertaken.Drawing on the CNFPA guidance, international good practice and impressions of current Romanian school capabilities, a ‘Concept Paper’ (guide) was drawn up consisting of the following sections:1. Introduction and overview2. Concepts3. Why is RNFIL important?4. Why should an IVET school become an Assessment Centre?5. Researching the ‘market’ for adult assessment services6. The assessment process 7. Essential preparation8. Preparing staff to become assessors 9. The accreditation process Three training events were delivered for 12 schools which had volunteered to take part with a view to becoming Evaluation Centres. One of these events was a one-day briefing for school directors (or nominated senior managers), in which representatives of CNFPA and CNDIPT also took part. This covered preparation issues including: the selection and training of staff;

facilities needed (including partners);

marketing and recruitment of candidates;

the requirements of the CNFPA;

availability of finance.

The other two events were for staff who might become assessors, and focused in some detail on competence-based assessment in the context of adult candidates and the assessment of prior learning. These impact of these training activities was to enhance the ability of schools to sustain and develop evaluation activities and to act as reference points for other schools.To supplement the original expert, a specialized expert in competence-based assessment was deployed to design and deliver the training event for staff. Mid-way through the project a local expert was recruited to take part in the training, to undertake research and to quality assure Romanian versions of the various documents and materials.In addition to these principal activities the consultants:

delivered a plenary address on RNFIL to the project’s interim conference in May;

made presentations to a thematic seminar on the quality assurance of competence-based assessment in June;

(though not specifically on RNFIL) delivered a keynote address to a CNFPA conference in September.



Observations on the future evolution of the Romanian system with respect to RNFIL.

As has been said, the evolving system created and overseen by CNFPA seems to be advanced in international terms. The consultants in this project did not have the remit to evaluate the quality of the actual practice (though we did visit one centre), but the ground-rules and formal quality assurance measures seem both practical and sound. Romania might well want to present this development to international audiences, who might well have something to learn from their experience. The key to long term success is likely to rest on the perceptions of the value of CNFPA certificates generally (ie. not those issued merely as a result of RNFIL) which are still fairly few in number and novel in terms of acceptance on the labour market, and on the demand from candidates (the two are of course linked).As far as the participation by schools in this system is concerned (which was the focus in this project), some challenges are likely to present themselves;

the first and foremost is the deployment of acceptable staff to act as assessors. There was considerable discussion, during the project, of the apparent CNFPA insistence that assessors must be currently working in the occupation for which they assess. This would rule out most, if not all, teachers (though not the ‘foremen’ assistants who oversee practical work in the trades at level 2 or below). This does seem a rather harsh requirement, and in our view ought to be reviewed by CNFPA in discussion with CNDIPT.7

the image of the school as a place of training only for young people. This will need some attention for some schools, though many are now participating as adult training providers and should have resolved any problems of this type.8

links and agreements with employers in order to provide the realistic working conditions (and assessment staff) which will be needed for successful operation. While most of the pilot schools reported good links with such partners, we suspect that these will need to be reinforced. In this context the ability and funds to pay employers for providing facilities may be critical.

So far as the wider objective of introducing competence-based assessment within the Romanian system is concerned:

though relevant, the particular methodologies of the CNFPA for adults and for those without formal learning, may be rather too stringent for application to young people within the formal system. The OECD work has revealed that frequently RNFIL assessment procedures are actually more rigorous than those applied to those in formal learning; there is a good (or at least understandable) reason for this – by definition one cannot quality assure non-formal and informal learning and this means that all quality assurance has to impinge on the assessment process (ie. to assure the outcomes). However in the case of formal learning, typically (and certainly in Romania) there are substantial quality assurance processes impinging on inputs (requirements for

7 moreover it does not seem to entirely accord with the CNFPA regulations which speak of “evaluatorii centrului urmăresc evoluţia ocupaţiilor în domeniul respective” – loosely translated ‘assessors keeping up to date with occupational developments in the respective domain’. While more general subject teachers of vocational students would fail to satisfy this (and would probably not be credible as assessors), those who taught specialized occupational knowledge and who frequently visited students on work experience might well satisfy it, and would probably in other countries be accepted as assessors.8 around two-thirds of the pilot schools were providing adult training. In the view of the consultants it would not be advisable for a school to become an Evaluation Centre without also providing the facility for ‘top up’ training for those who did not succeed in gaining one or more units of a qualification.



selection and training of teachers, specification of curricula, accreditation of centres etc.) which mean that the quality assurance of outcomes need not be so rigorously addressed. There is in short a danger of quality assurance ‘overkill’ if both RNFIL assessment methods and normal curricula quality assurance are combined;

nevertheless greater awareness by teachers of outcomes, and their ability and confidence to assess them would no doubt be beneficial, if only for formative purposes – to identify students who need more or less tuition and practice. Before any large-scale intervention on increasing the ability of teachers to undertake competence-based assessment is set in motion it will be important to obtain a realistic account of just what current practice actually is. As has been explained, there were different accounts of this, and it would be a shame if a large-scale ‘roll-out’ of competence-based assessment merely told teachers what they already knew and did;

when considering competence-based assessment for summative (certification) purposes, it should be realized that the training of teachers is not the only task. Policy and supporting instruments also need to be developed in parallel. For example, the format in which competences are recorded (should there be a national system?), the practice and responsibility for issuing unit certificates, and the implications for the final examination all need to be considered. Quality assurance implications also need to be considered. These can be costly and intrusive in a system of competence-based assessment and the correct balance needs to be struck between assurance on the one hand and cost and frustrating bureaucracy (for example in record keeping for audit purposes).

Credit TransferCurrent international concepts and context

The idea of credit transfer is simply that attainment in one qualification can be used to count towards another. The OECD9 has recently defined the common terms of credit, credit accumulation and a credit framework as:“Credit describes the value of an amount of learning. It can be transferred to a qualification other than the one in which it was gained. Credit can be allowed to accumulate to predetermined levels for the award of a qualification. The processes involved in valuing credit, transferring credit and accumulating credit are governed by rules in a credit framework.” (p 23, our italics)In his useful guide to qualifications frameworks for the International Labour Organization, Ron Tuck10 distinguishes between a closed (restricted) system of credits, where credits are transferable between a restricted set of institutions or qualifications (for example a school partnered with a university to build linked programmes, or one qualification which grants exemptions from another, because elements of each are agreed to be equivalent), and a more open Credit Accumulation and Transfer (CAT) system, where credits from any authorized institution or programme can be added to each other, according to an agreed set of rules, in order to contribute to an overall recognized level of attainment.To operate a CAT system needs:

9 Qualifications Systems, Bridges to Lifelong Learning, 2007.10 Tuck, R. An Introductory Guide to National Qualifications Frameworks: conceptual and practical issues for policy-makers, ILO, 2007.



a) a way of assigning component qualifications to levels, and – if modules of a qualification are able to count individually towards credit – a way of assigning each module to a level. Typically the assignment of levels is done through a national qualifications framework;b) unless all the qualifications (or component modules) are of the same size, a method is needed to measure the volume (or ‘weight’) of each participating qualification/module. This is usually done through calculating notional learning time – the time it would take a typical student to achieve the qualification or module11;Together these are combined to assemble a credit score for any participating qualification or module. Clearly a CAT system also needs some agreement on what a particular accumulation of units results in, other than the particular component qualifications. Linked to this last point, Tuck also distinguishes between general credit, where attainment of a certain value and a certain volume from a wide variety of programmes is added to give a ‘score’ for an individual (and a certain score is needed to attain a general recognized level of qualification – general minimum requirements for university degrees and school leaving certificates are examples of these in some countries), and specific credit where the particular content (outcomes) of one programme are recognized as counting to the requirements of another. While open CAT systems can operate on general credit, they cannot readily cater for specific credit, which relies on specific agreements about the comparability of particular qualifications. Evidently in the sphere of vocational and professional qualifications, it is particular knowledge and abilities which count rather than overall amounts of education and training, so specific credit is the more relevant concept.12

All this means that that one can have a workable arrangement of credits without having a system of credit accumulation, and one can have instances of credit accumulation without necessarily having a credit framework. The following examples show a progressive ‘sophistication’ in credit arrangements, from simple ad hoc instances to a general and universal system.

entry requirements expressed in terms of prior qualifications. One can only have access to a higher qualification if one has already gained a particular qualification (or a range of alternatives). Thus the prior qualification gives one a ‘credit’ in terms of counting towards access of a qualification, though does not actually count as part of the higher qualification. Many higher level vocational qualifications require completion of lower level ones, or some attainments in general education (cf. literacy and/or numeracy). In many countries access to higher education is via a secondary school leaving qualification (baccalauréat, matura, Abitur etc.);

exemption from part of qualification if one has all or part of another one. Such arrangements are specific to particular qualifications and may be negotiable on an individual basis. For example in Hungary a person may be exempted from (carry credit towards) the first year of a vocational higher

11 According to Tuck, a typical allocation of credit points is 1 point in respect of 10 hours of notional learning time. The ECVET proposal is for 60 points to be allocated to the learning outcomes expected to be achieved in a year of formal full time VET. The allocation is to be made for whole qualifications, with the attribution to modules on the basis of the estimated proportion of each module to the whole qualification of which it is part.12 this is not wholly the case, even in vocational/professional programmes. For example in some countries or professions a minimal level of education is required before a person can gain admission to a specific programme (e.g. a university degree is necessary for teacher training); some professions also require a regular amount of continuous professional updating to maintain a licence to practice – without specifying precisely the content of this training.



education qualification if they have completed a relevant vocational qualification at secondary school. In England, trainee lawyers are exempted from part of the Law Society’s required training if they have a university degree in Law (but not any other subject). Such arrangements acknowledge the relevance of particular qualifications, and are designed so that students can avoid studying the same things twice;

accumulation of credits within a qualification. Any modular qualification is built on the requirement that a module (unit)13 acts as a credit towards the whole qualification. By building up a series of modules a student ‘earns’ the whole qualification. Such qualifications are characterized by more or less complex rules of combination. At its simplest there may be a single set of modules, all of which are required to gain the qualification. Or there may be a mixture of mandatory and optional modules, or again (at the extreme) merely a given number of modules from a wide list of options. In each of these cases one has to accumulate the modules, which therefore act as credits towards the whole qualification;

credit transfer of modules/units occurs when one has an accumulation arrangement as described above, but some of the modules occur in more than one qualification, either as mandatory or optional components. This means that a person gaining a module while studying for one qualification may use that module as a ‘credit’ when applying for another qualification. The UK’s NVQ and BTEC systems have common modules as a design feature as does any system which has modules of key/core skills.

a general credit framework arises when accumulation and transfer arrangements exist not just between individual qualifications – set down separately for each one – but according to general rules across a range of qualifications. Such systems are perhaps most common amongst Universities (each of whom award their own degrees, and therefore would otherwise be subject to a very fragmented system with little opportunity for students to transfer between them). There are few examples in Europe outside the University sector. Scotland’s Higher Still system includes a credit framework, and is planned to be replicated in rather different form in England, though it is too soon to say what actual opportunities for transfer these give. Probably the longest standing credit framework outside higher education is the USA’s system of high school diplomas, though curiously it is not often referred to in the technical literature on this subject.

The main advantages of credit systems are held to be: they promote flexibility. Particularly under accumulation systems which

allow different combinations of module to gain a given qualification, they both allow choice for an individual, the potential for customization to the needs of a particular employer in a locality, and the ability to update elements of a qualification without revising the whole thing;

they promote efficiency. The idea of exemption can prevent someone needing to study the same thing twice, saving time and costs. Having common modules which ‘count’ towards a number of different qualifications

13 the term module is used here to denote any subset of learning within a qualification. The convention is growing in the UK, and some other Anglo Saxon countries to use the term ‘unit’ to denote a set of standards (learning outcomes), and ‘module’ to denote a phase of teaching (curriculum) within a programme of study. For the purposes of this discussion of credit, it does not matter which concept one uses, as credit can be awarded on the basis of (outcome-based) units or on the basis of (input-based) modules. But the distinction matters in the latest debates on ECVET, as will be apparent later.



means, in principle, that individuals can transfer between programmes without ‘starting again’. And entry requirements can clearly help ensure that those starting a programme have the necessary platform for learning;

they promote geographical mobility. A student who undertakes a programme in one place can continue it if they move location as they ‘carry credit’ with them. This is especially important in the higher education sector (where each University makes its own awards).

However it may be fair to say that these benefits are at present more theoretical than actual, at least in the field of VET. While the practices of setting entry requirements in terms of prior qualifications, and – to a rather lesser extent – granting specific exemptions from parts of higher level programmes, are fairly well established in a number of countries, modular designs of qualifications have in most countries only arrived in the VET field in the last decade or so.14 So far the actual number of individuals claiming and transferring credit between qualifications, or taking advantage of opportunities for mobility, seems to have been limited. Outside higher education and the US High School System, it would probably be fair to say that no country-wide, let alone international, general credit frameworks have been operational for long enough to say whether they actually give the benefits claimed.On the other hand some difficulties with credit transfer systems depending on modular design have become more apparent. At the technical level, there are clearly two:

there can be a mismatch between units consisting of employment-recognized standards and teaching modules of the curriculum (for the distinction, see the footnote on page 76). There can be good pedagogical reasons why these may be different, yet if they are then it is not easy physically to give exemptions within a teaching programme for those who have attained a unit of standards, even where two qualifications have the same unit;

where there are assessments which encompass more than one unit or module (for example in a terminal examination), it is not clear how one can actually give credit for the partial achievement. It would clearly be inappropriate for the entire examination to be credited since the individual has only demonstrated achievement of part of its requirements; on the other hand to give exemption from, say, certain questions would usually be impractical.

One strategy to deal with these problems would be to ensure that units of standards corresponded exactly with teaching modules, and to organize examinations on a unit-by-unit basis, but this may result in sub-optimal teaching and expensive or unreliable assessments. These factors may limit the introduction of widespread operational credit systems, though they may be less of a problem at the level of individual qualifications.Given the complexity of achieving technical solutions to issues of transfer between qualifications and student mobility between programmes in different national or sub-national systems, it was – in the consultants’ view – sensible to ask whether such goals could be achieved without further complicating the national qualifications system.

14 modular design has been a feature of the US High School system (including some initial VET) for many years, and a feature of some University programmes in the US and Anglo-Saxon countries certainly since the 1960s. In VET modular design has tended, before 1990, to be associated with Continuous Professional Development for established senior professional staff, though the UK BTEC system was established on a modular basis in the 1980s.



Application and adaptation for the projectThe Romanian VET system already has a number of the features that would – in principle – facilitate participation in a system of credit transfer, including:

modular programmes;

notional credit points attributed to each module;

explicit learning outcomes together with assessment guidance for each module (training standards in the case of IVET programmes, occupational standards in the case of CVT programmes);

correspondence (in most cases) between teaching modules and units of qualifications in outcome terms.

However, there is no ready correspondence between training standards and occupational standards used within Romania, and – of course – no system of correspondence between the learning outcomes of Romanian qualifications and those used in other countries.

The terms of reference state that the ‘guidebook’ required should be based on the European Credit System for Vocational Education and Training (ECVET). At the beginning of the project the EU Commission had yet to issue proposals for a ECVET. The expectation was that this would be an open system for recognizing vocational credit in one country and setting it against requirements for vocational qualifications in another, in the same way that ECTS allows for the transfer of credits within higher education across the EU. However it was very difficult to see how this might operate in the vocational sphere since it is specific requirements (specific items of knowledge, skills or competence) which characterize a VET qualification, rather than more general requirements for level and duration of study which tend to characterize higher education. Without correspondence of the definition of knowledge, skills or competence between national VET systems it was hard to see how and general scheme might operate. Following discussion with the CNDIPT it was decided therefore to interpret the idea of credit fairly broadly, and to address two practical issues:a) the maximization of what is learned during work experience in order to contribute real ‘credit’ towards the requirements of the TVET qualifications;b) practical guidance for students who study or gain work experience abroad, informing them, and schools, how to gain the maximum credit for their foreign experience.A concrete proposal for ECVET emerged in April 2008.15 This was much more modest than had been expected; rather than a general system for implementing credit transfer, it is – in effect – a model protocol for agreement between two institutions (or groups of institutions) about correspondence between their programmes, allowing for the exemption of parts of the programme in one institution for students who had completed certain parts of the programme of the other institution. In Tuck’s terms, therefore, this is a model for erecting a series of closed systems for the transfer of specific credit, rather than the creation of an open system of general credit. We have been able to refer to the ECVET model in the guidance at (b) above.Main products and activitiesA series of school visits in March helped inform the consultants about current practice in arranging, monitoring and utilizing work experience for pedagogical purposes. A visit was also made to a major employer who had actively

15 COM(2008) 180 final, 9 April 2008



participated in work experience programmes in the capital. The opportunity was also taken to ask the schools visited about their experience in student exchange programmes. Work experience was very common, and was a standard part of many programmes. National regulations had recently been introduced to ensure that proper agreements about work experience were drawn up. These included the respective responsibilities of the employer, the school and the young people, and also gave the opportunity for some assessments by the employer of the competence of the student as exhibited in the workplace. In some instances, though, it proved difficult to persuade students and their parents of the value of work experience.While there was a certain amount of experience of short student exchange programmes, few of these lasted long enough to warrant the formal transfer of credit. They were more geared to ensuring cultural exchange and language learning. In the light of the visits, it was agreed to produce much of the material in the form of short, user-friendly guides for students, parents and employers, and schools, rather than as a single ‘handbook’ on the rather theoretical topic of credits. So a suite of material was produced, comprising:

Using work experience – a guide for students and parents

Using work experience – a guide for teachers

Using work experience – a guide for employers

Giving credit for vocational studies abroad – a guide for school managers

Getting credit for vocational studies abroad – a guide for students and parents

A paper for policymakers on the concepts of credits and some international examples was also produced.

There is a synergy between the work experience elements of this strand and the work on RNFIL described earlier – in order for work experience to ‘count’ as credit it does need to be assessed in outcome terms, and the procedures used in RNFIL are one method of doing this. In that respect the participation in the thematic seminar on competence-based assessment (paragraph above) was relevant to this strand of the Task 3 also.Observations on the future evolution of the Romanian system with respect to credit transfer and assessment of work experience.So far as work experience is concerned, good practice can clearly be observed in Romania. The official guidance and regulations seem sound, though they may need to be adjusted to reduce paperwork for certain employers.16 In the schools visited it appeared that monitoring by teachers or foremen (maistre) was frequent – in one school it was claimed that this took place weekly. There is some danger that work experience is confined to the larger employers, including those with many establishments (for example retail or restaurant groups). Efforts may be needed to engage more small firms, and it may be that the official requirements will need to be adjusted to cater for employers who may be frightened by engaging in what may appear to be legalistic procedures. Also

16 for example, Metro Group, who the consultant visited, pointed out that a separate agreement needed to be physically signed in respect of each student who was offered experience. Since Metro required all contracts to be signed by a director of the firm (not, for example, a store manager), and since the firm was envisaging offering hundreds of places across Romania, there was going to be a problem of complying with official requirements.



frequent monitoring by school staff will become more difficult if students are placed in a wide variety of employers, many taking only one student. Yet confining work experience to the larger employers will restrict numbers (and therefore the duration of experience for each student), and deny students the chance of establishing relations with the smaller firms who may well be those most interested in offering employment after work experience. Additionally it is often the smaller firms who are most prepared to give students responsibility and a variety of tasks, which can be very helpful in promoting competence.Good practice has been mentioned. There is a need to promote this, but also – very importantly – for policymakers to gain a realistic impression of ‘typical’ practice and the range of practice between good and poor. Without this information there is a danger that requirements and expectations will run ahead of what is possible in many parts of the country, resulting in schools either ignoring the requirements or pretending that they are being satisfied. We would certainly recommend some national ‘audit’ of typical practice, perhaps through a co-ordinated exercise undertaken by school inspectors.It is one thing to procure and manage work experience; it is another to make the most of it. Hopefully the guides we have produced will help in this respect, but continued efforts will be needed to:

convince students and parents that work experience is important, and will help in securing jobs in the future. While schools, employers and policymakers are convinced of the ideas of competence and of the significance of practical experience, it may be that parents and students still associate advancement with classroom tuition and achieving progress through the educational system. It is important that practical experience is not seen as an alternative to educational progress, but as a necessary part of it;

determine the nature of assessment of work experience, and the respective roles of teachers, foremen and employers themselves in undertaking this assessment. Model assessment instruments will be helpful, as well as clarity about who should do what.

Using experience at work in an imaginative way when students return to the classroom or school workshop is essential. Learner-centred pedagogical techniques are relevant here (e.g. inviting students to share and reflect upon experience, and to identify remaining needs).So far as credit transfer is concerned, Romania will no doubt keep up to date with developments of ECVET. It is hard to tell, at this stage, whether the proposed ‘system’ (a model template really) will be widely used within VET in Europe. At present it seems sensible to leave schools to choose whether or not to use the template when conducting exchanges of students with institutions in other European countries, or whether to devise alternative arrangements on a bilateral basis.There is, in principle, the opportunity for Romanian policymakers to enter more comprehensive agreements with authorities in other countries, using the ECVET model. One could envisage that a series of agreements might be struck – qualification by qualification – declaring equivalences, and components of Romanian vocational qualifications which would give exemptions from components of those in another country (and vice versa). This, however, would require a considerable amount of detailed work, both in Romania and in any other countries concerned. Such work would not be warranted if only small numbers of students were involved in transfer. And it must be remembered that revisions to the qualifications, either in Romania or in the other countries, would require revision of the established equivalences and credits.



Before undertaking any such work it would be important to identify both the countries and the sectors where such work would be likely to be cost-effective; that would mean identifying areas where substantial volumes of student mobility existed, or were expected.



Task 4: Definition of 15 TVET core qualificationsIndicators of achievement

Production of Concept Paper identifying and describing the “core” qualifications;

A review of the descriptions of the 15 TVET “core” qualifications;

Completion of three training sessions of three days/sessions for 120 experts to be involved in the definition of the 15 “core” TVET qualifications

Current European Context

The Lisbon strategy and the open method of co-ordination (OMC) radically changed European policy co-operation in the area of education and training. It provided a platform to discuss education and training policies at European level, and the OMC offered the opportunity to build a coherent policy framework without impinging on national competences.The Lisbon strategy emphasised that the European measure to globalisation and the shift to knowledge-based economies must be provided during Lifelong Learning. People are Europe’s main asset and human resource development is the foundation to support inclusion into the labour market and economic growth. Lifelong Learning Policies has continuously been developed to support the individual countries. The Joint Council/Commission report on the Education and Training 2010 work programme from 2004 reinforced the need to ensure that all citizens have the opportunity to achieve the competences needed in a Lifelong Learning perspective. Priority was given to develop a common European Reference Framework regarding such key competences. A Reference Framework was recommended to the Member States in December 2006 and is especially addressed to initial education and training systems to offer all young people the means to develop key competences to a level that equips them with a basis for further education and working life. The Reference Framework includes 8 Key Competences: Communication in Mother Tongue, Communication in Foreign Language, Mathematical Competences and basic competences in science and technology, Digital Competence, Learning to Learn, Social and civic competences, Sense of initiative and entrepreneurship and Cultural awareness and expression.The EU VET sector development is also known as starting by the Copenhagen Declaration (November 2002) and continuing through the Maastricht Communiqué (December 2004).The Maastricht Study on Vocational Education and Training of 2004 indicated a gap between the levels of education required by new jobs, and the levels of education achieved by the European workforce. The survey shows that more than one third of the European workforce is low skilled whilst it has been estimated that by 2010 almost 50% of new jobs will require tertiary level qualifications, just fewer than 40% will require upper secondary education and only about 15% will be suitable for those with basic skills. At European level, the Maastricht Communiqué suggested:

Development of open and flexible European Qualification framework underpinned by set of common reference levels and founded on transparency and mutual trust

Development and implementation of European Credit transfer system for VET (ECVET)



European Qualification Framework

The first European Qualification Framework (EQF) of 1995 has gained discussed by a high degree of support from member states for the key feature, which acts as an umbrella, under which the member states can address the ongoing and future educational development to create transparency and open up the educational system to the wider world. In particular, member states see that the description of the 8 levels should be developed to a more focused version. The 8 levels are now described by overarching skills, knowledge and competence typology that the National Qualification Frameworks are intended to relate to. On 24 October 2007, the European Parliament voted in favour of the version adopting the Recommendation on the establishment of the European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning. The Council subsequently reached a political agreement on 15 November. The Parliament and he Council adopted the EQF on 23 April 2008.The press release from the conference in Lisbon 26/27 November 2007 outlines the intention and content of EQF and some paragraphs is therefore referred below as the description of EQF with my underlines in bold.The EQF will act as a translation device between the Member States' qualifications systems. This will help employers and educational establishments across Europe compare and better understand the qualifications presented by individuals. The Recommendation specifies that countries should relate their national qualifications systems to the EQF by 2010. By 2012, every new qualification issued in the EU should have a reference to the appropriate EQF reference level, so the benefits to mobility and lifelong learning that the EQF brings will be visible and available to every EU citizen.The European Qualifications Framework is a translation grid for qualifications around Europe. It has two principal purposes: (1) to promote mobility between countries, and (2) to facilitate lifelong learning. Commissioner Ján Figel’, the European Commissioner for Education, Training, Culture and Youth: “People in Europe too often face obstacles when they try to move from one country to another to learn or work. They even sometimes face obstacles when they want to move from one part of their own country's education system to another, e.g. from vocational education and training to higher education.”At the core of the EQF are its eight reference levels, covering basic to most advanced qualifications. These describe what a learner knows, understands and is able to do, regardless of the system in which the learner's qualification was acquired. The EQF therefore shifts the focus away from learning inputs (such as the length of a learning experience, or the type of institution), to learning outcomes.17

The current status in Romania

Romania has developed and implemented Technical Vocational Education and Training within the spirit of EU policy and initiatives during the last decade. Extensive effort and thereby results have been achieved with involvement and contribution from a huge amount of key stakeholders: authorities, labour market representatives, teachers and managers to the modernization of TVET at national and regional level.

Learning Outcome Based Qualifications

17 http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/educ/eqf/index_en.html


http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/educ/eqf/index_en.html


Qualification development has prioritized the modernisation and development of new qualifications responding to the needs at the labour market, and the implementation of learning outcome based qualifications. By the end of 2007, all TVET level 1 and 2 will be learning outcome based. Taking Learning Outcome Based qualification as a driver of change and shift from learning input centred qualifications, Romanian TVET has taken a crucial step to create a better match between the training providers and the needs of the labour market.It is a challenge to educational providers and key stakeholders in the labour market to be a part of and contribute to this paradigmatic shift. Common language in terms of new terminology and methodology has developed a foundation for communication among educational staff and key stakeholders. New relationships concerning integration of key stakeholders into the educational context have been created. Instruments and procedures have created new bodies and working methods. Because of the action-oriented competencies in form of skills, knowledge and attitudes, learning outcome based education also implies new assessment criteria. A new focus for educational staff and key stakeholders to a common direction and objective is created: this aims at qualification development that enhances the chances for the students to get an appropriate job or further education.

TVET qualifications

The qualifications are described by dividing the Vocational Training Standard into Key Skill Units, General Technical Units and Specialised Technical Units.The Key Units are common for all domains and are in line with the recommendations in the before mentioned European Reference Framework. The general specialised units characterize a domain and are expected to be used across specific qualifications. The Technical specialised units outline the characteristic of the work in a trade and identify, for example, work as cook.

National Qualification Framework

Development of a National Qualification Framework has been intensified during the last five years. Under responsibility of the Ministry of Labour, a coherent methodology is now available through NTBA. As the qualification methodology developed by the Ministry of Education and Youth already integrated learning outcomes qualifications and continuously has coordinated with the NQF methodology, the present challenge is clarification and coordination.

Tripartite Agreement on the National Framework of Qualifications

Employers and trade unions have joined a governmental agreement on establishment of Sectoral Committees within NTBA in 2004. Tasks and responsibilities are described for the Sectoral Committee; key among these are:

Development and updating the qualifications relevant for each domain, under the coordination of the National Adult Training Board

Evaluation and certification of competencies

Validation of qualifications and standards



Identification of specialists in order to undertake the occupational analysis to define competencies and qualification and for the evaluation and certification based on standards.

The Sectoral Committees have only relatively recently been set up, thus their procedures and experience are as yet at an early stage.

Task Description

Reforms in the TVET sector started during 1994/95 and since then successive initiatives have modernized the sector. The current task is to take further steps adjusting TVET to a Lifelong Learning perspective by developing vertical mobility from Level 1 – Pre-University Education to Level 5 – Higher Education18. Development of coherent core qualifications within each of the 15 VET domains to provide the educational system with continued routes. As the task, developing core qualifications was analysed and discussed between the technical assistant and PIU the new educational proposal was agreed as setting the overriding principles for development of core qualifications. The proposed new educational structure is negotiated during the project time and consequently the developed contributions to new qualifications are not proposed for validation and inclusion in the Professional National Qualification Register.The central task within the context of the proposed new educational structure was development of general technical units within all TVET domains at level 2 and 3. The main aspects of the new educational proposal are described below:Grade 9 will be a common year in the new proposal. One of the main consequences by the proposal extending primary compulsory education with one year is that pupils will achieve more competencies starting vocational training. Higher degrees of general competencies are also one of the main factors improving educational coherence and opportunities for Lifelong Learning ensuring that all citizens have opportunities getting best possible key skills in for example mother tongue, foreign language and mathematic. Youngsters will get a year more to decide and improve skills and abilities for further training and initial career.IVET level 1 will be abolished and vocational education and training VET will last for 2 years, which correspond to the present qualifications at level 2.If 6 months apprenticeship is added = certificate for a certain qualification and level 2, certificate to the Labour Market. If additional 2 years will be added (XII, XIII) – technical education and training (TVET) and additional 6 months apprenticeship is added = Baccalaureate and level 3 of qualification. Certificate to the Labour Market and Higher EducationThe present level 3+ will not be influenced by the proposed changes.

Grade Level RO Access to:

EQF

6 month apprenticeship

Level 3, Baccalaureate

Higher Education or Labour Market or Post high school

Qualification4

XIII Technological High school

3XII

18 Level 1 – 5 is the Romanian levels and if European Qualification Framework levels are meant in this document it is stated.



6 month apprenticeship

Level 2 + Certificate

Labour Market

3

XI Vocational Education

2XIX General

Compulsory Education

NB. The table is made according to the new proposal of the Law of Education.

Objectives and activitiesDevelopment of Concept paper for core qualifications, 4.2.1

A concept paper was developed in cooperation with PIU to identify, define and describe the core qualifications on three seminars in March 2008 and it is attached as annex 2 to this report.Besides the concept paper, training material was developed supporting the description process and training the authors: analysing present qualifications, identification of educational pathways and the correlation with the Labour Market and Higher Education, description of domains and possible sub-domains, identification of new general technical units at future level 2 and 3 and template for Learning Outcomes.

Training sessions defining core qualifications 4.2.2

Three training sessions was carried out on the below dates and in cooperation with PIU representatives.

Dates PIU representatives at seminars

In total 133 participants trained

19 - 22 March 2008 Paula Posea 34 participants

23 – 26 March 2008 Gabriela Ciobanu, Angela Popescu,Dorin Rosu, Mihaela Stefanescu

58 participants

27 – 30 March 2008 Catinca Scriosteanu, Claudia Calinescu

33 participants

At the seminars, the participants described headlines for new key and general units. One General Unit was developed within each domain implementing the concepts introduced to serve as best practice examples developing the rest of the General Units after the seminars.Identification of Short-term key experts (STE) developing the core qualifications was done prior to the training seminars as the invited participants were trained as authors of the qualifications in question. The STE’s were contracted to deliver the result of the work done by June 2008; which was changed to end of September 2008. The follow up seminars reviewing the core qualifications and developing corresponding curricula were postponed in accordance with the general renewal of planned project activities. Review of the description of the core qualifications took place at seminars on:18 – 19 September 200829 – 30 September 200806 – 07 October 2008



Impact of completed activities

The Romanian TVET system is facing new challenges to develop vertical educational mobility and establish the conditions for Lifelong Learning.At the training session the intended results were achieved and a common learning process took place. The participants offered generally positive feedback and were satisfied with the seminars. The review of the general technical units at the seminars in September/October indicated that some modifications were needed and the final delivery was decided to 31 October to PIU. The development of the core qualifications within the context of a new proposed educational structure included considerations about the two different vocational routes: the progressive and the so-called direct VET route. During the seminars, attention was paid to the coherence between Vocational and Higher Education developing educational pathways and the core qualifications. This agenda is thereby spread and initiated among educational providers and employed ad an important issue.Although emphasising the vertical educational perspective there is a balance to be struck between creating a system that has clear opportunities for progress to higher education, and a TVET that is attractive for students who are mainly interested in and focused on practical skills and trainingThe core qualifications were developed within the following 15 domains:

Profiles Domains

TechniquesMechanics (Mecanică)Electro-mechanics (Electromecanică)Electronics and Information Technology Industries, (Electronică automatică şi informatică industrială)Chemical Industries ( Chimie industrială)Electrical (Electric)Construction and public works (Construcţii şi lucrări publice)Graphics (Technici poligrafice)

ServicesCommerce and services (Comerţ)Tourism and food processing (Turism şi alimentaţie)Beauticians (Estetica şi igenia corpului omenesc)

ResourcesWood processing (Fabricarea produselor din lemn)Textile and leather industries (Industrie textilă şi pielărie)Construction materials (Materiale de construcţii)Agriculture (Agricultură)Silviculture and environmental protection (Silvicultură)

A thematic seminar on the theme of Articulation, held in Sinaia 24-25 September involved representatives from both the Higher Education and the Technical and Vocational Education sectors, who met to discuss means by which the two sectors may relate more closely. The emphasis was on identifying how progression for Romanian learners may be facilitated, from TVET to Higher Education, throughout their careers.

The workshop had as its goal identifying possible models for the articulation of TVET with Higher Education, to support the development of a policy suited to



Romania. The underlying concern is to be able to realise the European Union education policy, that “life-long” learning should be available to all citizens, and that national systems should enable opportunities for such continuing learning.

Life-long learning implies not just initial education and training for young people, vitally important though this is, but also the provision of opportunities throughout the working career of an individual for acquiring new skills and competences additional to initial education and training. The transition to the knowledge-based economy, which is recognised and encouraged by European Union policy, demands that these learning opportunities are readily available.

The workshop considered a number of models, from the EU nations and the USA, with specific examples from the United Kingdom and from Denmark, both nations where the links between the two sectors are very thoroughly articulated: in the Danish experience particularly, it was notable that the system operates as one, with no significant divide between the sectors and readily-available transfer points between the sectors.

The workshop highlighted:

- The need for qualifications with no dead ends and with identification of meeting points establishing vertical progression. Recognition of formal learning, comparing qualifications, might be an initial approach to analyse and develop methodologies for articulation.

- concerns that the TVET system in Romania lacks a tier of vocational learning parallel to that of academic high school education, inhibiting opportunities for progression. - the need for a much greater dialogue between the TVET and HE sectors. Participants agreed that the workshop, an unprecedented opportunity for the two sectors to discuss shared problems, demonstrated the need for continued interaction and indicated a need for some structural provision for ensuring cooperation between the sectors.

- the potential advantages of physical proximity and joint operation between TVET and HE providers, removing perceived barriers and facilitating transfer for learners between the sectors.

A typology of methods of articulating the links between the two sectors was presented, setting out ways in which international experience shows that TVET and Higher Education can operate as a continuum. The workshop was not seeking to prescribe a particular method for Romania, but to identify significant issues that may inform the development of a national policy.

The typology identified the following matters, which are of course not exclusive categories: a system of articulation may have several of the characteristics below.

- Cost to the learner: life-long learning can be expensive for the learner, and a crucial requirement is to offer opportunities for continuing to study while working. The workshop explored the notion of attendance at university or college outside working hours or by distance learning, methods compatible with maintaining full-time employment;

- Re-entry to learning: for prospective students with few qualifications from formal secondary education, provision for re-entering the formal education system



must be made. The example of the US Community Colleges was used, in which there are few or no requirements for prior academic achievement, but support is given for acquiring the skills of learning, and provision made locally and at times best suited to students with work and family commitments;

- Accessibility: specific programmes can be offered for such students, aimed at adults wanting to return to education. A UK model offered is the Access programme, studied in a TVET institution and, if successfully completed, accepted by a university partner as the equivalent to academic secondary school qualifications;

- Inclusivity: a guiding principle must be that education is open to all citizens, and in order to be inclusive it may be necessary to positively reach out (in English, an “out-reach strategy”) to engage minority groups with formal education. Minorities may be defined by ethnicity or language, but may also be defined by lack of income or lack of confidence in their own ability to learn;

- Credit for prior learning: methods of accrediting prior learning are central to ensuring articulation. This may mean either (i) formal learning in TVET institutions which may exempt students from some part of a Higher Education programme on the basis of having already developed the required competences, or (ii) the more complex “prior experiential learning” whereby a student lacking formal academic qualifications is admitted to Higher Education on the basis of clear evidence of working or life experience, which has developed competences equivalent to formal qualifications. Examples were offered of the types of evidence, which may be regarded as valid to justify such credit for learning from experience, replacing formal study.

- In-company schemes: providing learning in the workplace is common in some advanced economies. Examples were offered of programmes developed jointly between employers (public bodies and commercial enterprises) and TVET or HE institutions. The EU policy on this matter is clear, the London Communiqué of 2007 specifically calling for greater cooperation between employers and education in the design of curriculum. Workplace learning is a dimension of such cooperation.

- Formal links between institutions: dialogue between TVET and HE providers is essential (see the major issues from the workshop, above). Dialogue can lead to formal contracts, by which HE institutions guarantee progression from partner TVET institutions.

- Provision for mid-career change: given that the trend in advanced economies is for individuals to change career, rather than take one professional role for life, the HE and TVET sectors need to be responsive to re-training individuals. As well as Continuing Professional Development (see below) within an individual’s professional field, TVET institutions will encounter a need for persons changing career. Such learners may well have prior HE qualifications, but be seeking specific technical skills for a new career.

- Continuing Professional Development: in all careers, it is necessary to keep in touch with evolving technical knowledge and new developments. TVET institutions have an important role to play in offering customised programmes to professionals who are working.

Recommendations from the seminar



At the seminar representatives from three domains: Information Technology, Construction and Tourism analysed Training Standards trying to identify overlapping content and learning outcomes searching for possible recognition within educational pathways and thereby credit transfer.

The presentations from the working group at the seminar indicated that there might be areas that is worth analysing thoroughly and for such work a common methodology is needed ensuring the same approach across domains and equal quality.

Recognition of prior learning in a wider perspective including practical experiences was also discussed for example related access to Universities and new types of entry exams might be needed.

The need for part time studies was discussed to support lifelong learning and the challenges for Universities.

Related to the development of a National Qualification Framework the presentations of the curriculum design respectively Vocational and Higher Education illustrated a common outcome based approach as well as some differences.

To develop common and most relevant methodologies for articulation supporting the continued process developing a coherent educational framework for Lifelong learning the seminar indicated that cross-sectoral working groups might be effective.

More specifically it is therefore recommended: Establishment of cross-sectoral working groups with representatives from Primary Education, Youth Education including both General and Vocational Education and Higher Education.

Cross-sectoral working groups working within specific sectors as examples to develop and test methodologies for recognition of former formal education and credit transfer. Methodologies should take the curriculum design and a future National Qualification Framework into consideration. Representative from Primary Education could be an expert in some of the main subjects in a domain.

Cross-sectoral groups as advisors for future development of new qualifications or at present as part of the process developing a new educational structure.

Cross-sectoral groups analysing if a Framework for Key Competencies facilitating access throughout the educational system is relevant or other strategies could create similar flexibility. Adult education should be included in such an analysis in the perspective of Lifelong Learning and future part time studies.

A Concept paper ‘Core Qualifications’ is located in Annex 4



Task 5: Definition of 16 HE qualifications

Indicators of achievement

Definition and description of 16 HE qualification profiles at level V, in economic sectors as recommended by REAPs or other forecasting/planning instruments for HE and proposed to NAQ in view of validation;

Sixteen training sessions of two days/session for 200 experts to be involved in the definition of the 16 HE qualification profiles. (The sixteen training sessions were compressed to four sessions with four days/session and one training session of 3 days/session)

Background and context

The current project addresses the definition of qualifications, against the European Qualifications Framework (EQF). The larger part of the project’s activities is in technical and vocational education, but an important theme is the relation of education at that level to higher education. Continuity in the education system through the levels, opportunities for students to progress between levels and opportunities for life-long learning are matters influencing the project.

The Bologna process of harmonising European higher education sets out three cycles through which students may progress, each with specific requirements and awards appropriate to the level of study (in English, Bachelor, Master and Doctor: in Romanian, Licentiu, Masterat, Doctorat). In a previous phase of the project, a number of degree qualifications at Bachelor level were defined, as a pilot. The current phase extends this process of definition, and provides for 16 qualifications to be defined, mainly at Master level.Qualification definition in the project has been guided by the widely-accepted method of setting out the competences and skills which a graduate a defined level should be able to demonstrate. The programmes which have been defined in the current phase are in various domains, in science, engineering and the social sciences. Continuity with the previous phase is specified in the TOR, and the qualifications defined in TVET5 in most cases build on that phase. Most of the Master’s level qualifications defined relate to a Bachelor’s- level qualification already defined, although in xxx cases both Bachelor and Master have been defined.Defining graduate competencies involves identifying what a graduate will be able to do: thus, the competences are expressed as in terms of what the graduate can do, or what he/she will have as a body of technical knowledge.

Purpose

The project is to assist Romanian universities and other higher education institutions to locate their activities against EU norms. ACPART (The National Agency for Qualifications in Higher Education and Partnership in the Economic and Social Environment) has responsibility under the law for approving qualifications, and has taken the lead in the current phase in selecting and inviting subject experts to take part in defining qualifications. The qualification definitions, now in their final stage of completion, will be submitted to the ACPART Council for approval, and then will become the standard



against which Romanian universities will be considered when they submit programmes for accreditation. This is a standard European approach and will align Romanian universities with EU practice.

Method

The project has technical assistance from an external expert (currently, from the United Kingdom) but relies on the collective expertise of senior academic staff from Romanian universities, a number of whom have been appointed as local experts to facilitate the process of qualification definitionThe aim is to build, in Romanian universities, a body of examples and of expertise, in order that all programmes in the universities may eventually be re-defined against the EQF. The qualifications have been defined in draft at a series of seminar / workshop sessions in May and June. The method has already been clearly defined by ACPART (and is available on the Agency’s website). The exercise has been nation-wide: workshops have been held in four locations around Romania outside Bucharesti and participants have been invited from universities which provide programmes in the subject domain for which qualifications are being defined. The pool of intellectual expertise in Romania is the resource on which the exercise relies.Seminar / workshops were held in Brasov 15-18 May, Mamaia 22-25 May, Sinaia 5-8 June and Iasi 19-22 June. About 140 university staff in total were involved in these, with a further 58 persons involved in the summary seminar in Cluj 18-20 September.These training sessions were followed by qualification-specific groups, working primarily by email, to refine the Qualification Descriptions. The members of the groups were specialists in the discipline concerned, working within the common framework being developed and tested by ACPART.Thirty three short-term local experts were appointed, as distinguished in their discipline area and conversant with the ACPART methodology. Experts provided leadership in the refinement of the Qualification Descriptions. Each expert was associated with a particular qualification or in some cases related qualification.The ACPART methodology for defining qualifications was explained and discussed in detail at the seminars, and participants then worked in domain-based groups to complete the “grids”, the two forms which ACPART has defined to make the process simple, Examples of how to complete the grids were given at each seminar / workshop by Romanian experts who had taken part in the pilot phase, passing on and sharing their expertise and reflections on the process.

Outcomes

The seminar / workshops have defined 16 qualifications. These Qualification Descriptions are in their final stage of refinement by short-term local expertsVery useful debate took place, particularly about the balance of “professional”, subject-specific competences, and “transversal”, generic, competences. As these the workshops particularly addressed Master qualifications, there was extensive discussion on what competences should be required at that level, additional to those previously acquired at Bachelor level.The methodology has been thoroughly tested and discussed. At the summary seminar/workshop the collective experience of defining the qualifications were brought together. Issues which are common to defining qualifications were identified (those questions which emerge, irrespective of the domain and the programme) and recommendations for refining the methodology were considered.



The prospect for re-defining higher education qualifications in Romanian universities is bright, and the project has been able set out some clear models.



Task 6: Development of draft curricula for the “core” qualifications


Three training sessions of 2 days/session for 100 experts to be involved in the update/improvement of the TVET curricula;

Draft curricula and curriculum auxiliaries formulated for the defined qualifications;

Training modules for “core” qualifications adapted for students with learning disabilities/special educational needs;

Draft methodologies formulated for revision, development and evaluation of learning materials.

The first part of this report on task 6 is concerned mainly with task based on the results of task 4 describing core competencies within each domain and relates to the development of curricula based on the proposed new educational structure. To distinguish the second part, based on the completion of task 6.3, this appears in text boxes below the first part.The current European Context - ECVET and EQFThe Copenhagen declaration of 30 November 2002 set the priority of developing a credit transfer system for VET as one of the common measures necessary for promotion of “transparency, comparability, transferability and recognition of competences between different countries and at different levels” 19 This priority has supported development of ECVET: a European system for the transfer of learning credits for vocational education and training.20

The environment for the development of ECVET is becoming quite favourable due to the approval of EQF and the eight levels.Combination of EQF levels and Credit Points can be clustered for units of competences or a whole qualification and opportunities for credit transfer as well as a mechanism to indicate progress to the learners and horizontal and vertical movement in education.Credit points are characterised by an EQF-level and at national level, several methods are possible for determining the number of credit points to be allocated to a qualification and to units. For example, the number of credit points allocated to a qualification and units can be determined on the base of the following criteria: The contents of a qualification in terms of range and/or volume of knowledge,

With reference to a notional average length of programme leading to such a qualification

The competent bodies at relevant national level can fix the number of credit points to be allocated to a qualification and to units and the national qualification framework can include rules about credits.

19 Copenhagen Declaration by the Ministers of Vocational Education and Training of the EU Member States, the EFTA/EEA and candidate countries, the Commission and the European Social Partners ;20. EUROPEAN CREDIT SYSTEM FOR VET (ECVET)TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (REPORT OF THE CREDIT TRANSFER TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP) Brussel, 28/06/2005

20



A proposal was presented to the EU Commission and Parliament in 2008 and is still being debated.

Romanian contextTraining Standards

Qualifications in Romanian TVET are described as Training Standards, which are validated by thee Sectoral Committees which represent the employers, employees and the professional organisations The approach is competency-based curricula describing the learning outcome, the needed training to achieve the outcome and assessment criteria related to the learning outcome.each unit of competences and not for each module. A Training Standards document includes:

Competences units – statements based on a coherent set of learning outcomes

Reference level Credit value Competences/ related learning outcomes Performance criteria Learning environment conditions Assessment criteria

The curriculum includes: Introductory note Position of the module within the curriculum, list of learning outcomes

belonging to the module Table showing coherence between learning outcomes and content: Assessment requirements Methodological suggestions Bibliography

Task descriptionThis task is based on the results of task 4 describing core competencies within each domain and therefore the development of curricula was based on the proposed new educational structure. At first, the purposes of the curriculum were clarified:As regulations from the educational authorities ensuring homogeneity between the educational providers and the standards at the schoolsAs guidelines supporting the educational providers carrying out the training regarding

The methodological and practical planning of the training Coordination of the training between teachers Selection of assessment methodologies

It was agreed to use a curriculum template in line with the present and involve participants at the seminars making recommendations on how curricula supports the processes at school level by SWOT analyses.Principles for the curriculum content were discussed between TA and PIU and guidance for the development was to establish:

A clear connection between Training Standards and Curricula regarding the concepts of knowledge, skills and competencies



Clear correlation and distinction between units and training modules

Objectives and activities

Two main outputs referring Terms of Reference 3 training sessions of 2 days for 100 experts to be involved in the

update/improvement of the TVET curricula

Draft curricula and curriculum auxiliaries for the defined qualifications

Training programme design, contents and approval (task 6.1.1.)

Training material was developed for the training sessions of curriculum authors and focused on the guiding elements of the curriculum. The list of training material is attached in Annex 6.The movement towards new practices is calling for pedagogical approaches that turn the focus to the students’ achievements of learning, the preferred learning strategies of students and the application of knowledge, what the student is able to do at different stages of the learning process. The role of the teachers is changing from presentation of knowledge and skills to the role as facilitator of the students’ learning processes. A new relationship between the teachers, the content and the students is in play. The questions was raised how the curriculum at present support teachers and schools implementing the paradigmatic shift from lecturing to active involvement of students.

Implementation of the training programme (task 6.1.2.)

Three training sessions were carried out on the below dates and in cooperation with PIU representatives:

Dates PIU 114 participants were trained

18 – 19 September

Gabriela Ciobanu, Angela Popescu, Dorin Rosu, Mihaela Stefanescu

40 participants - curriculum authors

29 – 30 September

Catinca Scriosteanu, Claudia Calinescu

35 participants - curriculum authors

06 – 07 October Paula Posea, Dorin Rosu 39 participants - curriculum authors

At the seminars, the participants reviewed the core qualifications developed under task 4 ensuring the needed content and correspondence with EQF descriptors. SWOT analyses were carried out regarding the supporting character at school level of the present curricula and recommendations for a good curriculum document developed. The recommendations contributed to the process describing curricula. Within each domain, the authors developed one curriculum as example that was discussed. Exchanged experiences and received feedback for improvement.

Draft curricula and curricula auxiliaries for the core competencies (task 6.2)Draft curriculaIdentification of Short-term key experts (STE) developing curricula was done prior to the training seminars as the invited participants were trained as authors of the qualifications in question.



The STE’s were contracted to deliver the result of the work done by the end of October 2008 to PIU.Curricula were drafted for all general technical units within the domains in accordance with task 4.

Impact of completed activities - Curriculum methodology

Recommendations for a good curriculum document based on SWOT analysis developed by participants at the seminars serves as foundation for the following aspects. As guidelines supporting the educational providers carrying out the training areas indicated for improvement are:

The level of the content in curricula, there seems to be a tendency that the content is described at too high level in the present curricula,

The technological development and within services needs updating The division and coordination between practical and theoretical training

needs clarification and guidelines Too much overlap between Training Standards and Curriculum

Recommendations regarding the use of the curriculum at the schools included: It must be useful for both new young teachers and experienced teachers It must be inspiring to read Correlation between number of hours, credit and content Examples illustrating student-centered methodologies for example projects Ideas and templates for formative and summative assessment The curriculum is used at the beginning of the school year among teachers

coordinating and planning training activities

Applying the recommendations the developed curricula might serve as good practice and ideas for curricula documents within TVET. Furthermore, ideas for implementation of Training Standards and Curricula at school level are indicated, especially about the needed coordination between teachers.

Recommendations

The following recommendations are based on swot analysis from the curriculum seminars in September and October 2008 and summarises the finding from the evaluation report that include the background material.

Strengths

The identified strengths reflect the needs of the Training Standards and the Curricula establishing vocational standards and that these regulations are the foundation for the activities at the school: planning training and designing teaching. The module-based approach is acknowledged and the locally developed curricula are recognised as an opportunity to meet the local economic needs.

Weaknesses

Intentions and realityIt is my understanding that the weaknesses expressed in the analyses cover several themes that are related to the intentions supporting development of skills and competences and the observed practice of more theoretical studies at the schools. First of all this assumption is not that surprising as the transformation from lecturing and theoretical studies to learning activities supporting the students’



active involvement using a variety of practical approaches is generally taking place in Europe and within educational sub systems. That said this is especially important in vocational training because of the practical nature of these qualifications.

Assuming a gap between reality and intentions, efficient steering principles between central and local level and the feed back mechanism to the central level is of particular importance. Seminar participants acknowledge the Training Standards and the Curricula as important steering mechanism at school level. Feedback mechanism from the schools to the central authorities on implemented practice has not been discussed during this task but some sort of regular feedback on the progress could provide important information considering initiatives or response to the schools.

Coherence between Training Standards and CurriculumSome statements indicate discrepancy between the two regulating documents that the Training Standards outlines the idea of skills and competences while the curriculums and the assessment methodologies describe and indicate theoretical content of the training. This hypothesis might be oversimplified although it explains combined expressions of overloaded curriculum, the lack of coherence between the content and the type of training suggested, lack of practical training, too high level, no adaption to students needs and too general methodological suggestions in the curriculum. If this hypothesis is recognised as relevant to investigate analysis of some selected examples could indicate how possible discrepancy appears and which strategic changes could balance that both Training Standards and Curriculum prescribe competence based training and learning processes.Development of methodological recommendations with examples of learning activities, learning styles and student centred methods are recommended by seminar participants as valuable guidelines to inspire good practice. Development of Curricula is a comprehensive process for which reason examples of good practice and inspiration could be left outside the curriculum and set up as additional material easier to exchange and maintain, a sort of net based “idea box”. This approach could simultaneously illustrate how intentions and reality is understood and valued by central authorities.

Summary of recommendations for curriculum design developed by participants from the seminars, not prioritised

Better correlation between number of hours, credit, content and level indicators Curriculum should include methodological recommendations together with good practice examples; Increase in the number of hours for practical training (lab, workshops and companies) Recommendations regarding evaluation tools adapted skills and competence development Correlation between certification exam and evaluation of the activity throughout the school year Correlation of the bibliography with the contents from curriculum Development of curricula with a more systematized content and clear language

TA recommendations



The following recommendations are based on the TA analysis of the swot analysis:

Development of implementation strategies of The Training Standards and the Curricula as strategic instrument renewing and developing vocational training

Efficient feedback mechanism to the educational authorities in order to take adequate action on curriculum development or other supporting material

Analyse if the Training Standards, Curricula and assessment methodologies prescribe the same kind of training and development of skills and competences besides knowledge

Development of good practice examples for training activities including practical training and distribution among the schools

Development of assessment methodologies especially for achieved skills and competences

The second part of this report on task 6 deals with 6.3 – relating mainly to all but the second planned output Because of legal requirements the draft curricula to be developed under the second planned output could not take place. The following strategy was therefore agreed with the PIU: 100 teachers would be trained in the development and adaption of curriculum auxiliaries for use with students who have Special Educational Needs.

Draft modules focusing on the needs of students who have Special Educational Needs would be developed. These have been completed by the PIU.

A draft methodology for the revision, development and evaluation would be developed See Annex 6

Planned Output 1: Three training sessions of 2 days/session for 100 experts to be involved in the update/improvement of the TVET curricula.Three sessions of 2 days duration each were provided:Session 1: 22nd to 24th May 2008Session 2: 29th to 31st May 2008Session 3: 5th to 7th June 2008All training events took place in Buşteni, RomaniaThe aim of this training program was to train up to 100 teachers in the development of learning materials focused on students who have Special Educational Needs.100 participants were invited to attend. A total of 78 participants attended the sessions:Session 1: 30Session 2: 25Session 3: 23Sustainability was enhanced by the development of a 122 page participant guidebook that could be used within schools by teachers and trainers.Documents ProducedThe production of the “Special Educational Needs Course Support Materials”;



122 page participant guidebook for use during the training sessions and for future reference contributes toward sustainability. See Annex 6AccreditationThe training courses were accredited by the NCPTE, the Romanian National body for teacher training accreditation. Participation in the training events will therefore form part of attendees accredited continuing professional development.Quality Assurance and sustainabilityParticipants were asked to complete an evaluation questionnaire at the end of each training event. The evaluation questionnaire included two sections each designed to collect data on different aspects of the training session.Section 1 included 9 questions focused on gathering data related to the effectiveness of the training session in achieving it’s stated objectives. Responses indicate that on average over 99% of participants agreed that the stated objectives of the training sessions were achieved. Section 2 included 11 questions focused on gathering data related to the quality of the learning and teaching experience provide during the training session. Responses indicate that on average over 99% of participants were highly satisfied with the quality of the learning and teaching experience provided during the training sessions.The data thus confirms the contribution of the training impact to sustainabilityDetails of the data collected are provided in Annex 6.

Task 7: Development of draft curriculum auxiliaries/learning packages


Four training sessions of two days/session for 150* experts to be involved in the elaboration of the 150 learning packages corresponding to the “core” qualifications;

Completion of 150 learning packages; Draft guidebook created for implementing the learning packages for

students with special educational needs; Four training sessions of two days/session for 100 teachers and

foremen from rural schools covered by the project.Comments

The planned number of events under the final output would be contemporaneous with other training and would have put schools under considerable strain to release staff. To ease the demand on schools it was agreed with the PIU that the number of course presentations would be re-planned as two larger events that would include at least the same number of participants.

Planned Output 1: Four training sessions of 2 days/session for 150 experts to be

Session 1: 54Session 2: 32Session 3: 42Session 4: 27

Sustainability was enhanced by the development of an 89 page participant guidebook that could be used within schools by teachers and trainers.



Evaluation of the learning packages developed

The aim of evaluating the learning materials was to ensure that the packages developed contribute towards students achieving their full potential in the subject being taught. It would however have been unreasonable to expect materials developers to meet standards they had not been trained in. The scope of the evaluation process was therefore limited to the information provided during training and in training materials.The evaluation process was carried out by a team of local curriculum experts representing the 16 knowledge domains working under the supervision of the Key Expert. In addition, the PIU made their own curriculum experts available.The local curriculum experts were provided with one days training to introduce them to the process requirements. The process was then undertaken by the experts (working from home or office) accessing the materials from a web site.Evaluation focused on the criteria detailed below. Note that in each case evaluators were provided with guidance on how the criteria should be employed.

Criterion: Do the materials include all sections of the provided curriculum auxiliary template?

Guidance: A copy of the curriculum auxiliary template is provided in appendix 1. All curriculum auxiliaries should minimally include all sections of the template.

Criterion: Are the materials scientifically correct?Guidance: The content of materials should be factually correct in terms of current understanding within the domain.

Criterion: Do the materials provide students with a range of practical activities?

Guidance: The focus of student activities should be to provide students with a range of engaging practical activities that give students opportunities to develop the practical skills they require to become competent within the area being taught.

Criterion: Are the materials differentiated to address the needs of a range of learners?

Guidance: Have learning objectives been broken down into steps that enable less

able students to reach their full potential? Are activity instructions clear and concise? Is teacher guidance on differentiation provided? Are extension materials provided for more able students?

Criterion: Have the materials been designed to eliminate bias and stereotyping?

Guidance: Images and textual references should make equal reference to the whole potential user community in terms of culture and gender physical abilities.

Criterion: Are the activities student centred in terms of content, approach and presentation?

Guidance: Key areas include:



Language: Is the language level appropriate to the user group? Are sentences short and grammatically correct?Images: Do images help clarify and illustrate the text? Are images age appropriate? Are images of high quality?Approach: Do examples relate to student life histories and experience? Are opportunities for individual and group working provided? Do the materials include opportunities to support the development of a positive self-image by the student; for example by focusing assessment on student strengths and providing guidance on areas for further development.

Criterion: Do the materials encourage the use of technology to enrich student learning experiences?Guidance: The use of technology can enrich student learning experiences by providing additional stimulus and by providing opportunities to develop additional skills. Students can be encouraged to use technology directly:

For example by being asked to use a computer, camera or some other form of technology as part of an activity

Or indirectly For example by being encouraged to submit word-processed assignments,

include their own photographs in assignments, provide presentations as assignment responses.

An evaluation template and scoring guide were provided. The template was used to record scores together with any comments. One copy of the template was completed for each curriculum auxiliary.



Curriculum Auxiliary Evaluation TemplateAuxiliary TitleDomainCurriculum ReferenceAuthorEvaluator

Criterion: Do the materials include all sections of the provided curriculum auxiliary template?

Score Tick one 1 2 3 4 5 6Comments:

Criterion: Are the materials scientifically correct?


Criterion: Do the materials provide students with a range of practical activities?


Criterion: Are the materials differentiated to address the needs of a range of learners?


Criterion: Have the materials been designed to eliminate bias and stereotyping?


Criterion: Are the activities student centred in terms of content, approach and presentation?


Criterion: Do the materials encourage the use of technology to enrich student learning experiences?






Curriculum Auxiliaries Evaluation Scoring GuideScore the materials 1 to 6 for each indicator where:

1. Excellent: The materials are outstanding or sector leading

An evaluation of excellent represents an outstanding standard of materials that exemplify the very best practice and are fully worthy of dissemination.

2. Very good: Major strengths

There are very few areas for improvement and any that do exist will not significantly diminish student’s experiences. Whilst an evaluation of very good represents high standard materials, it is a standard that should be achievable by all. It implies that it is fully appropriate to continue to make use of the materials without significant adjustment. It implies that the developer has achieved a high standard and could develop the materials further to achieve excellence.

3. Good: Important strengths with areas for improvement

An evaluation of good applies to materials characterised by important strengths which, taken together, clearly outweigh any areas for improvement. An evaluation of good represents a standard of provision in which the strengths have a significantly positive impact. However, the quality of students’ experiences is diminished in some way by aspects in which improvement is required. It implies that the developer should seek to improve further the areas of important strength, and take action to address the areas for improvement.

4. Adequate: Strengths just outweigh weaknesses

An evaluation of adequate applies to materials characterised by strengths that just outweigh weaknesses. An evaluation of adequate indicates that the materials will provide students with access at a basic level. It represents a standard where the strengths have a positive impact on students’ experiences. However, while the weaknesses are not important enough to have a substantially adverse impact, they do constrain the overall quality of students’ experiences. It implies that the developer should take action to address areas of weakness by building on identified strengths.

5. Weak: Important weaknesses

An evaluation of weak applies to materials that have some strengths, but where there are important weaknesses that either individually or collectively may be sufficient to diminish students’ experiences in substantial ways. It implies the need for prompt action on the part of the developer.

6. Unsatisfactory: Major weakness.

An evaluation of unsatisfactory applies when there are major weaknesses in the materials requiring immediate remedial action. Students’ experiences are at risk in significant respects. The developer requires immediate support from senior managers to plan and carrying out the necessary improvements.

Documents Produced

“Enriching Learning Materials”; 89 page participant guidebook for use during the training sessions and for future reference. See Annex 7

Accreditation



The training courses will be submitted for accreditation by the NCPTE, the Romanian National body for teacher training accreditation. Participation in the training events will therefore form part of attendees accredited continuing professional development

Quality Assurance

Participants were asked to complete an evaluation questionnaire at the end of each training event. The evaluation questionnaire included two sections each designed to collect data on different aspects of the training session.

Section 1 included 13 questions focused on gathering data related to the effectiveness of the training session in achieving the stated objectives. Responses indicate that on average over 94% of participants agreed that the stated objectives of the training sessions were achieved.

Section 2 included 11 questions focused on gathering data related to the quality of the learning and teaching experience provide during the training session. Responses indicate that on average over 99% of participants were highly satisfied with the quality of the learning and teaching experience provided during the training sessions.

A summary of averaged responses and details of the data collected are provided in Annex 7. Once again this shows the contribution to sustainability.

Learning Package TitlesThe following learning package titles were developed:AgriculturăAnexa 1 Teh cr anim - Tehnician in agroturismAnexa 1 Teh cr porcilorAnexa 2 Teh cr porcilorAnexa 3 Teh cresterii porcinelorAnexa Rasele de taurine crescute in sistem ecologicAnexe teh cr bovineloAuxiliarul legume ecologiceAuxliar Tehnician In AgroturismBiotehnologii moderneCalificarea Tehnician in agriculturaCol Agr Falticeni Tehnician in agroturismCompetenta 16Gestiune si evidenta economicaLegumicultura 1Legumicultura 2MA350Materiale de invatare FalticeniMateriale De Invatare Clasa a-XI-aMateriale de OnvModul elemente de agropedologie1



Modul elemente de agropedologie2Modul elemente de agropedologie3ParazitologiaPatologia obstreticalaPatologie InfectioasaPatologie medicalaPomicultura 2Protectia plantelor 1Protectia plantelor 2Protectia plantelor 3Protectia plantelor 4Protectia plantelor 5Tehnologia cr anim in zona montanaTehnologia cr anim. - Tehnician in agroturism 1Tehnologia cr anim. - Tehnician in agroturism 2Tehnologia cr rumeg in sist ecologic 1Tehnologia cr rumeg in sist ecologic 2Tehnologia Cultivare CerealelorTehnologia cresterii bovinelor 1Tehnologia cresterii bovinelor 2Tehnologia cresterii porcinelor

Chimie IndustrialăAnaliza apeiAnaliza instrumentalaArdelean Metode de separare si purificareLivia manole asigurarea calitatiiMaterii prime si materiale pentru industMaterii prime si materiale pentru industria chimicaOpertii de transfer de masa

ConstrucţiiAuxiliar 4 concept design 3Auxiliar 4 tehologia altor produseAuxiliar 46Auxiliar nivel 3-1Auxiliar nivel 3-2Auxiliar MasuratoriDesen tehnic de constructii si lucrariDesen tehnic de instalatiiDocumentata tehnica de executie pentru produse finite din lDocumentatia tehnica 4Instalatiilor de alimentare cu apa si canalizare pptMaterii prime si materiale 4



Modul Planificarea si org prodModul proiectare in constructiiPlan arhitectura pptPlan armare planseuPlan cofrare planseu pptPlan fundatii pptPozitia corpurilor de incalzire fata de coloanele instalatiei pptPrezentare 1 pptPrezentare 2 pptPrezentare 3 pptReprezentarea instalatiilor de gaze naturale pptTehnologia mobilei 1Tehnologia mobilei 2Tehnologia mobilei 3

Electronica şi AutomatizariCircuite electonice analogiceCircuite electronice digitaleCircuite logice combinationale

Estetica şi Ingrijirea Corpului UmanAuxiliar EsteticaCoafarea ParuluiCopertaEstetica-INGRIJIREA PARULUI auxiliar curricularMSE A mod

Industrie AlimantarăCond calit 12 final SibiuCond calit 13 final SibiuContr proc bioch probabil final El DoamnaDeterm val nutrit final AlexandriaFabr malt final Motoc BucurestiLeg fructe final Motoc GalatiMarketing final Motoc GalatiPaine final Motoc BucurestiPreg cereale final Motoc GlPreparate carne final El DoamnaTal final RomanTehn ferm final TulceaTehn prod lact si bz final SibiuTehn vin final El DoamnaZahar final Motoc Bucuresti

Materiale de Construcţii



Auxiliar asig calit cismasAuxiliar asigurarea calitatii cismas siunieBaremeCopertaMetode si tehnici de evaluareProcedee de fabricarein ind sticleiProfesorStruct metal XII samTeste

MecanicAuxiliarMecanicAuxiliarMecanic MHP

Resurse NaturaleAuxiliar operatii de baza in labConservare BiodiversitatiiFenomeneMat reprezTehnician ecology

ServiciiContabilitatea Evenimentelor si tranzactiilorContracte economiceCoresondenta in activitati de secretariatExploatarea serviciilor PosteleFinantarea afacerii auxiliarImage medicaleMarketingul afaceriiMediul concurentialNegocierein afaceriPromovarea servicilor postale

SilvaculturăConstructia produselor din leminDendrometrieMaterial de invatare - DendrometrieMaterial de invatare- Eoclogie ForestieraRegime si tratamente

Tecnic: Electric; Electromecanic; Electronică şi Automatizări; MecanicAnaliza circuitelor electroniceAnaliza sistemului energeticAuthoritati in transport



Aux ExploatareaAux Lucrari de intretinere si reparatiiAux Tehn neconventionaleAuxiliar curricular-Exploatarea si intretinerea retelelor de TcAuxiliar furduiAuxiliar ModulXIAuxiliar UIvaina18Auxiliar m8 cls12 hardware mentenantaAuxiliar m11 cls11 instalare softwareAuxiliar mas si inst indAuxiliar sist transm miscAuxiliar Tehnician Prelucrari La CaldCADComunicare vizualaComunicatii de date si retele de calculatoareDimensionarea instalatiilor electriceDocumente MentenantaDocumente transportExploatarea tehnica transportHardware crosswordHardware diagramaIntretinerea si repararea masinilor si utilajelor 2M8 - Mentenanta mucnMarimi electriceMasini unelte cu comanda numericaMasurarea marimilor fizico-chimiceMasurarea umiditatii pptMijloace de masura pentru densitate pptMijloace de masura pentru marimi fizico-chimiceMijloace de masura pentru marimi mecaniceMijloace pentru masurarea lungimilor pptMijloace pentru masurarea marimilor mecaniceMijloace pentru masurarea rugozitatii pptModul mijloace de masura pentru marimi fizico-chimiceModul mijloace de masura pentru marimi mecaniceModul coord si monitoriz transportModul echipamente electrice si electroniceModul manipulare marfuriModul sisteme de transportModul tehnologii de prelucrare la cald SALAIModul testarea automobiluluiModul masurarea marimilor electriceModulul marimi fizico-chimiceModulul mijloace de masurare pentru marimi electrice



Modulul verifiacrea metrologica si etalonarea mijl de masurare 1Modulul verificarea metrologica si etalonarea mijl de masurare 2Modul verificarea metrologica si etalonarea mijloacelor de masurareMonitorizarea instalatilor si echipmentelor energeticePregatirea productieiProiectarea circuitelor electronice 1Proiectarea circuitelor electronice 2Protectia instalatiilor electriceRidicarea schemei electrice a blocurilormodulelorRidicarea schemei electrice a blocurilorSisteme de operare in reteaSistemul energeticStruct MetalStructura sisteme calculTehnici si sisteme de comutatieTehnici si sisteme de radiocomunicatiiTehnician electrician-electronist autoTehnician metrolog masurarea marimilor fizico-chimiceTehnician metrologTehno preluc cald salaiTehnologii prel caldTehnologii prel cald salaiUngerea sistemelor tehniceUtilizarea componentelor si circuitelor electronice

Technici PoligraficeFinisare in lucruRotative ofset cu hartia in bobina auxiliar curricular

Textile-pielărieAuxiliar clasa a XII aAuxiliar Constructia TiparelorConstructia tiparelor pentru incaltaminteConstructia tiparelor marochinarieMaterii prime textilePlanificarea si organizarea productieiProces de productie in confectiiSanatate si securitate in muncaStructura si projectarea tricoturilor

Turism şi Alimentaţie PublicăActivitatea de servire in restauratieBerevoescu M VII Cls XIIBucataria nationala si internationala



Dezvoltare durabila Relatii publice 4

Task 8: Revision and update of the distance-learning materialsIndicators of achievement

One 2 day training session for 16 distance education co-ordinators to be involved in the revision of the distance education materials;

Revised versions of the 15 guides/curriculum modules for developing distance education materials elaborated during Phare 2003, and of the 50 learning materials developed during Phare 2004;

Eight training sessions, of a minimum two days/session, for a total of 150* participants from the 150 TVET schools, in using the distance education materials in their respective schools.

*Subsequently revised to be 300 participants at the request of the PIU.

Comments

The training planned under the third requirement above would have taken place in parallel with other training and would have put schools under considerable strain to release staff. To ease the demand on schools it was agreed with the PIU that the number of course presentations would be re-planned as four larger events that would include at least the same number of participants.

Planned Output 1:

One 2-days training session for 16 distance education coordinators to be involved in the revision of the distance education materials

One session of 2 days duration was provided:Session 1: 14th to 16th May 2008 in Sinaia, Romania

The aim of the training sessions was to ensure that participants have the competences they will require to successfully manage the revision of distance education materials. A total of 17 persons attended the session.Sustainability was enhanced by the development of a 28 page participant guidebook (ODL Course Materials) that could be used for future reference. In addition a set of Visual Interface Guidelines would be developed. The guidelines would provide coordinators, materials designers and materials developers with a comprehensive requirements guide that would ensure consistency across learning materials revision and development.

Documents Produced

“ODL Course Materials” participant guide

“TVET On-line Learning Environment Materials Development Guide”; a 104 page guidebook for coordinators, materials designers and materials developers

AccreditationThe training courses will be submitted for accreditation to NCPTE, the Romanian National body for teacher training accreditation. Participation in the training events



will therefore form part of attendees accredited continuing professional development.

Quality AssuranceParticipants were asked to complete an evaluation questionnaire at the end of each training event. The evaluation questionnaire included two sections each designed to collect data on different aspects of the training session.Section 1 included 15 questions focused on gathering data related to the effectiveness of the training session in achieving the stated objectives. Responses indicate that on average over 97% of participants agreed that the stated objectives of the training sessions were achieved. Section 2 included 11 questions focused on gathering data related to the quality of the learning and teaching experience provide during the training session. Responses indicate that on average over 95% of participants were highly satisfied with the quality of the learning and teaching experience provided during the training sessions.The data collected is detailed in Annex 8



Task 9: Revision and update of the quality assurance manuals and guidelines


Revised self-assessment and inspection manuals produced for TVET;

Revised Quality Guidebook for Higher Education produced;

Concept paper on QA and accreditation mechanisms for TVET and HE;

External monitoring visits carried out to the 150 TVET schools and the Universities comprising the eight consortia;

One training session of three days minimum, for at least 24 people responsible for QA in each University of those included in the eight consortia;

Five training sessions for 150 QA co-ordinators in schools

Preliminary Note

Whilst VET and TVET share many common feature sin the context of this Report, the manifest differences in the background, structure and approach require highlighting. To ensure that this clarity is obtained, the first part of this section concentrates mainly on TVET; following this is a further section specific to HE VET, which to assist distinction is presented in a text box. Therefore, please note that the text of task section 9 of the report is based on the Concept papers for TVET and VET (HE) respectively

TVET

Introduction

This project, financed under the PHARE 2005 allocation had a special focus on the sustainability of results from the previous three-year reform cycle of 2001-2003, and of achievements from the PHARE 2004 programme. The present project was the second phase and aimed particularly at continuing the correlation to HE developments which was started during the previous project.The specific results of PHARE 2005 were targeted at consolidating the impact of reforms and integrating the quality assurance frameworks of both TVET and HE. Therefore, Task 9 combined activities for both the TVET and HE sector.

BackgroundTVET Background to QA Mechanisms

The implementation of a national QA framework formed part of the modernisation of the Romanian VET system, in which government deregulation signifies greater autonomy for VET providers. This put new emphasis on quality assurance, quality control, and quality improvement. Between 2003 and 2006 Romania developed, piloted, implemented, and revised quality assurance instruments for the TVET system. Starting in 2003 Romania was at the forefront of adopting European developments in QA for VET; in particularly



the CQAF was adapted to the national context, and a proposal for QA Mechanisms in TVET was developed together with two instruments, the Self-assessment Manual and the Inspection Manual, which are based on the European Guide for Self-Assessment of VET Providers.The methodological pillar is the self-assessment process undertaken annually by VET providers. The self-assessment process is supported and monitored through external monitoring activities. During the academic year 2003/2004, with the help of European-funded PHARE projects for TVET development, the use of the two manuals and associated manuals was piloted in 22 TVET schools. Another 100 TVET schools joined the pilot phase during the academic year 2004/2005. In 2005/2006 an additional 50 TVET schools especially selected from rural areas were added to the 122 existing pilot TVET schools to undertake further piloting of TVET QA Mechanisms; and since 2006 TVET QA Mechanisms have been implemented nationally in all TVET schools.In 2006 the National Framework for Quality in Education was validated at national level through the ratification of Law 87/2006 on Quality in Education to approve the Government Emergency Ordinance 75/2005, which set up the legal institutional framework for developing and implementing quality assurance mechanisms at both system and provider levels.

On the basis of Law 87/2006 two national quality agencies, ARACIP and ARACIS, were established and charged with developing quality assurance frameworks for Pre-University and Higher Education respectively. According to Law 87/2006 TVET schools and their programmes are approved against the ARACIP Authorisation and Accreditation Standards, and graded against a 5-point scale. To be judged “satisfactory” a TVET school has to meet all 43 indicators of the Accreditation Standard. Higher grades of “good”, “very good”, and “excellent” are measured against the ARACIP Reference Standards.

During 2007 CNDIPT adapted the National Framework for QA in Education (Law 87/2006) to the specific requirements of TVET; and, since the academic year 2006/2007 the TVET QA Mechanisms have been implemented in all 1316 TVET schools by ministerial order. According to Ordinance no 4889/09.08.2006 issued by MoERY all TVET schools have to draft an annual self-assessment report and to submit it to the general school inspector in charge with quality assurance. TVET schools measure their findings from the TVET QA Mechanisms self-assessment process against the indicators and 5-point grading scale when completing the ARACIP self-assessment report format.The TVET QA Mechanisms emphasise making evidence-based judgements on strengths and weaknesses. The performance descriptors in the TVET QA Mechanisms not only identify the status quo of competence and quality, they are also used as improvement targets for those areas where TVET schools identified weaknesses. Judgements within the TVET QA Mechanisms are not based on how many of the performance descriptors have been achieved; but, on the quality of that achievement. Furthermore, TVET schools have to evaluate the impact of their performance on learners and on other stakeholders.The TVET QA Mechanisms criteria are learner-centred; thus, putting the learner at the heart of TVET schools’ activities. During the self-assessment process TVET schools are expected to collect and respond to feedback from learners, staff, and other relevant stakeholders. TVET schools also have to measure how well they achieved the criteria. By using the national database of key performance indicators and comparing their own findings with national data TVET schools identify priorities for quality improvement.

European Context



TVET European Context for QA Mechanisms

During the life of this PHARE 2005 project the recommendations for EQARF-VET (see below) were finalised, and new emphasis was put onto the EQF Quality Principles. The transition to a knowledge-based economy (Lisbon European Council 2000) requires relevant reforms and continuous improvement of vocational education and training (VET) systems. An effective and efficient VET system must be able to provide timely and appropriate responsiveness to rapid changes in economy and society, to increase employability and social inclusion, and to improve access to lifelong learning for all. Furthermore, the Barcelona European Council in 2002 set the target of making Europe’s education and training systems a world quality reference by 2010. Romania faces the challenge of reducing the gap between its development level and that of other EU Member States, and of achieving the European objectives of economic and social cohesion.The Copenhagen Process was launched as the contribution of VET to the challenges identified in the Lisbon-Agenda, and to enhance European co-operation in VET. The Copenhagen Process established the following political priorities for the achievement of the Lisbon goals in VET:

strengthening of the European dimension in VET

improvement of transparency, information and counselling (European curriculum vitae, diploma supplements, Europass, uniform European framework for foreign language learning)

recognition of competences and qualifications, including non-formal and informal learning (recognition systems based on common principles, credit point system for VET, common principles for the validation of non-formal and informal learning)

cooperation in the field of quality assurance (co-operation by means of an exchange of models and methods, development of general criteria and principles for quality in VET)

The Technical Working Group on Quality in VET (TWG) was established by the Directorate-General Education and Culture of the European Commission at the end of 2002 in order to advance the common European goals in the field of quality in VET defined in the course of the Copenhagen Process. It received a mandate from the European Commission, which it fulfilled by the end of 2004. The mandate covered

the establishment of an analysis of the current status, the identification of criteria for quality development

the identification and description of quality indicators for VET at system level (good practice basis),

the conception of a Common QA Framework for the development and reform, respectively, of quality systems in VET (Common Quality Assurance Framework)

the description of methods and instruments for the support of self-assessment and quality assurance

The first review of the Copenhagen Process took place in December 2004 at a ministerial meeting in Maastricht. The core content of the Maastricht Communiqué is the agreement to develop a European Qualification Framework (EQF) as well as



a European credit point system for VET (ECVET). The Maastricht Communiqué linked the Copenhagen Process more firmly with the “Education and Training 2010” work programme and, for the first time, introduced national priorities:

raise awareness, implement, and use agreed instruments

improve public / private investment, including training incentives through tax & benefit systems and use of EU Funds

address the needs of groups at risk - low skilled, older workers, early school leavers, migrants, persons with disabilities, unemployed

develop open learning approaches & flexible more individualised pathways to enhance progression

strengthen planning of VET provision, including, partnerships, and early identification of skills needs

develop pedagogical approaches and the learning environment in training organisations and at work

enhance competence development for VET teachers & trainers

The Maastricht Communiqué also emphasised the great importance of achieving high quality and innovation in VET systems. The other priorities were:

consolidate existing Copenhagen priorities

examine the specific learning needs of VET teachers and trainers

improve the scope, precision, and reliability of VET statistics

The second follow-up conference of the Copenhagen Process took place in Helsinki in December 2006. In the Helsinki Communiqué VET is once again assigned the central task of contributing to the competitiveness and social cohesion (Lisbon Strategy). Moreover it is emphasised that in the future a more focused approach will be necessary, which is to be oriented towards the following four priority areas:

adjustment of policies towards an enhancement of the attractiveness and quality of VET; in this context more importance should be attached to “good governance” of the VET systems, institutions, and providers

further development, testing, and utilisation of common European instruments for VET (EOF, ECVET, Europass) with the aim of having them available by 2012; in this context an intensified collaboration in the improvement of quality through the use of ENQA-VET is propagated in order to develop a common view of quality assurance

enhancement of the scope, comparability, and reliability of VET statistics by 2008

active involvement of all stakeholders in the activities for the implementation of the Copenhagen Process

In the two years following Copenhagen, the Education Council reached political agreement on a number of concrete results; in particular, a resolution on guidance throughout life, principles for the identification and validation of non-formal and informal learning, a common framework for quality assurance in VET, and the



EUROPASS single framework for the transparency of qualifications and competences.The “Copenhagen Process” identified quality assurance in VET as a priority topic for European cooperation, underlining its role in promoting mutual trust, in boosting mobility, and in facilitating access to lifelong learning. The Common Quality Assurance Framework for VET in Europe (CQAF) was developed and endorsed by the Education Council in May 2004. Member States were invited to promote the CQAF on a voluntary basis, together with relevant stakeholders. The CQAF, which was updated in September 2005, is a framework model that is to serve the EU member countries as a reference for the development and reform, respectively, of quality systems in VET at national level. The CQAF describes basic principles, criteria, and instruments that are to be taken into consideration in the implementation of national quality assurance systems in VET. In July 2007 the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union published their proposal for a recommendation for the establishment of a European Quality Assurance Reference Framework for VET (EQARF-VET), which was revised in 2008. The objective of this recommendation is to establish the EQARF-VET which was revised in 2008. The objective of their recommendation is to establish the EQARF-VET as a reference tool to help Member States to monitor continuous quality improvement of their VET systems, and to examine how the existing quality assurance models work. The EQARF-VET includes:

a model based on self-assessment, and combined with internal evaluation, and external evaluation by third parties, to be identified by Members States as appropriate

a set of quality criteria and a reference set of quality Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) as measuring tools to facilitate the evaluation and improvement of VET systems and provision by Member States and relevant stakeholders, through a reference set of quality indicators

Quality assurance is also a crucial dimension of the European Qualifications Framework (EQF), and commitment to a set of common principles is a precondition for cooperation between stakeholders at different levels. The EQF stipulates that quality assurance systems need to be set up at national level in order to ensure improvement and accountability of education and training. The systems should aim at increasing the effectiveness and transparency of provision at all levels, and thereby, promote mutual trust, recognition, and mobility, within and across countries. Building on the Common Quality Assurance Framework in VET and the Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Higher Education, 9 common principles have been promoted by the European Parliament21, and have been agreed for the TVET QA Mechanisms. Based on the assumption that quality assurance is necessary to ensure accountability and improvement of education and training, QA mechanisms should be carried out in accordance with the following principles:

QA policies and procedures should underpin all levels of the European Qualifications Framework

QA should be an integral part of the internal management of education and training institutions

QA should include regular evaluation of institutions, their programmes or their quality assurance systems by external monitoring bodies or agencies

21 European Parliament (2007): Report on EQF A6-0245/2007-19/06/07



External monitoring bodies or agencies carrying out quality assurance should be subject to regular review

QA should include context, input, process, and output dimensions, while giving emphasis to outputs and learning outcomes

QA systems should include the following elements: clear and measurable objectives and standards

guidelines for implementation, including stakeholder involvement

appropriate resources

consistent evaluation methods, associating self-assessment and external review

feedback mechanisms and procedures for improvement

widely accessible evaluation results

QA initiatives at international, national, and regional level should be coordinated in order to ensure overview, coherence, synergy, and system-wide analysis

QA should be a cooperative process across education and training levels and systems, involving all relevant stakeholders, within Member States and across the community

QA orientations at Community level may provide reference points for evaluations and peer learning

In October 2005 a European Network in Quality Assurance in VET (ENQA-VET) was established by the European Commission to build sustainable cooperation in the field of Quality Assurance in VET across Member States. The network will function through National Reference Points for Quality Assurance. This work is linked to the Lisbon goals and the targets set by the Barcelona Council in March 2002. The main tasks of the Network are the development of EQARF-VET as a continuation of the CQAF, as well as the encouragement of co-operation amongst the relevant stakeholders at a national and European level. The Network will assist in the development and improvement of the quality of VET structures at national, regional, and local levels, fully respecting the diversity of quality assurance systems in Member States.

Current Position

TVET Current Position on QA Mechanisms

Decisions about policies and strategies for VET provision are the responsibility of the two ministries, MOERY and MLSSF. The development of collaborative working arrangements between the key istitutions s (including MoERY and MLSSF at the policy level and ARACIP, CNDIPT, etc at system level) is essential to ensure that the holistic approach of the national quality assurance framework can be fully realised.The National Group for Quality Assurance in VET (GNAC) was established under the coordination of MOERY through CNDIPT and agreed with ARACIP, NATB/NAQ, and National Teachers Training Centre. The GNAC functions as the



National Quality Assurance Reference Point in VET, which represents the national contact point for the European Network for Quality Assurance in VET (ENQA-VET.GNAC is a structure for inter-institutional coordination. Its main aim is to promote and develop specific QA instruments in the Romanian VET sector, in accordance with the recommendations of the CQAF and EQARF. It has the following main roles:

facilitating the inter-ministerial coordination from an integrated perspective of the VET system

informing the relevant stakeholders on the ENQA-VET activities

ensuring the national support for implementing the ENQA-VET work agenda

supporting the implementation of the CQAF in the national context

making the stakeholders aware of the benefits of using the principles, methods, and criteria proposed by CQAF

supporting the organization of peer learning visits, and the experience exchange at European level

making proposals and recommendations for the stakeholders about QA in VET

The GNAC is made up of representatives from permanent member organisations (MOERY, MLFEO, ARACIS, NATB, CNDIPT, CNFP), from observing organisations , and from organisations that are invited as guests (e.g. sector committees). The GNAC will carry out its activities according to an annual work plan proposed by the president and approved by GNAC members.Since its inception in 2006 the new body of the Romanian Agency for Quality Assurance in Pre-University Education (ARACIP) has developed authorisation, accreditation, and external evaluation criteria and indicators, which include initial TVET. The key functions of ARACIP are the approval of initial TVET providers and their programmes, as well as the external evaluation of their level of quality every 3-5 years. ARACIP has also established a 5-point grading system against which TVET providers grade the results of their self-assessment process. For TVET schools there are basically three strands of external auditing: inspection, external monitoring, and external evaluation. External evaluation of quality is undertaken every 3-5 years by ARACIP trained external evaluators. Inspection falls under the responsibility of the inspectorate and examines the delivery of the curriculum every 4 to 5 years. In addition general, deputy, technical, and quality inspectors have been trained in external monitoring. The external monitoring procedure was developed during the pilot phase in 2004 in order to have some control over TVET schools’ implementation of the self-assessment process. At the same time the internal monitoring procedure was iintroduced to identity at an early stage the difficulties piloting TVET schools were facing. After the pilot inspectors and TVET schools gave feedback on both procedures and related documentation. Both procedures were considered to be beneficial in supporting TVET schools’ processes, and, therefore, the external and internal monitoring procedures continued after the initial pilot phase, and were formally established by ministerial order 4889/09.08.2006.Since the external monitoring process is already well established, trained inspectors are available to carry out this procedure. The process is normally carried out twice per year. The first visit aims to support TVET schools in their self-assessment, whereas the second visit validates their self-assessment report.



External monitoring visits are at the discretion of the inspector; and an inspector might make one or more visits per year. Therefore, external monitoring visits have the following objectives:

evaluation of the teaching, practical training, and learning process, with particular stress on the utilization of learner-centred methods

reporting on the implementation of the self-assessment process

validating the self-assessment report and improvement plan

obtaining feedback from a variety of stakeholders

examining documentation of the self-assessment process

gathering information on the nature and efficiency of TVET school partnerships and/or networks

reporting on strengths, improvements, and examples of good practice at system and TVET school level

reporting on weaknesses and difficulties at system and TVET school level

providing advice and guidance, and supporting TVET schools in the implementation of self-assessment and quality improvement

According to Law 87/2006 all TVET schools have to establish a Quality Evaluation and Assurance Commission (QEAC) made up of representatives of teachers (other than senior managers in the institution), parents (in the case of mandatory education), learners, social partners, and representatives of the local board. The QAC is chaired by a Quality Coordinator, and works with senior management and the administrative board to elaborate and coordinate the procedures for quality assurance and self-assessment. It is responsible for producing and publishing the TVET school’s annual self-assessment report, and for implementing a system of quality management and internal quality assurance to ensure the improvement of quality.

The results of the self-assessment report (SAR) inform the annual improvement plan which is used for the annual revision of their school action plan (SAP). The plans address any weaknesses identified during the self-assessment and set targets to increase learner focus; to deliver high-quality teaching and training; to promote effective learning; to develop staff capacity; to improve employer engagement; and to meet local skills needs.

Locally-developed curricula are part of TVET schools’ local provision to meet local needs, working with employers and/or other relevant stakeholders. The locally-developed curricula are approved by inspectors and social partners. This aspect of TVET QA Mechanisms ensures that social partners and communities can be confident that learning providers are meeting their needs and offering high-quality and relevant services. It also ensures that the skills and capabilities of teachers, lecturers, trainers, support staff, and managers are continuously developed and enhanced.

Stakeholder Analysis

TVET Stakeholder Analysis



There are a number of institutions and agencies with responsibilities in VET quality assurance. The following are the most prominent regarding quality:

NATB: the National Adult Training Board will be the National Authority for Qualifications (NAQ) coordinating the Sectoral Committees; ARACIP: the Romanian Agency for Quality Assurance in Pre-University Education is supporting the implementation of quality assurance in VETInspectorate: in addition to inspections and external monitoring, regional inspectorates organise examination centres at different TVET school locations and supervise examinations at county levelSector Committees: these committees are responsible for validating the vocational training standards, which were developed for each qualificationCNDIPT: the National Centre for TVET Development works under the auspice of MOERY, and is responsible for developing training standards and national vocational curricula, as well as for supporting TVET schools in implementing QA mechanisms

During the PHARE 2005 project CNDIPT collaborated especially with CNFPA (NATB) on QA mechanisms in VET. In discussions it was agreed that TVET and CVT QA Mechanisms in Romania are to be based on the EQARF and on the EQF Quality Principles (Annex 3 of EQF)..

Task Description

TVET Task Description

Quality Assurance methodologies and instruments were developed and piloted during previous projects; and have been implemented in 1316 TVET schools since the academic year 2006/2007.

Task 9 aimed at consolidating these developments by organising external monitoring visits and school-based assistance to 150 PHARE-assisted TVET school directors, deputy general inspectors, and MOERY inspectors in charge of QA. This included preparing external monitoring guidelines, organising visits, organising and delivering required training, and reporting back to the beneficiary.

In the case of the revision of existing quality manuals, the project prepared revised texts, and proposed corrective actions. The project formulated a proposal for a concept paper for QA in TVET.

As for the TVET QA Mechanisms the project assured the methodology for implementing the framework at both system and provider level, according to the the QA in education lawand in cooperation with ARACIP.

TVET Task ActivitiesRevising and Updating Quality Assurance Manuals and Guidelines

The Terms of Reference (ToR) stipulated 6 activities under task 9 both for higher education (HE) and vocational education & training (VET). The activities are based on the TVET QA Mechanisms22, the TVET quality assurance framework that had been developed under previous PHARE projects, and was also piloted and revised from 2004 to 2006. Since the academic year 2006/2007 all 1316 TVET schools

22 The TVET QA Mechanisms have adopted the criteria of the European QA Framework and the European Guide to Self-Assessment (CEDEFOP, 2003)



have been required to implement the quality assurance framework. This implementation on TVET provider level has been accompanied by external monitoring processes on the system level.

Revising and Updating Pilot Versions of Self-Assessment and Inspection Manuals

Task 9 is an extension of the previous project. The self-assessment and inspection/external monitoring manuals had already been revised after the pilot phases, and are no longer pilot versions. In addition, the previous edition (5th version, 2007) of the manuals and guidelines has already taken account of the National Framework for Quality in Education (Law 87/2006).

However, as part of the ongoing process of adapting TVET QA Mechanisms to recent developments in Europe (EQARF, EQF) and the National Quality Framework (Law 87/2006) further revisions of the quality principles and criteria were undertaken during the PHARE 2005 project. Some procedure explanations were also improved for better understanding, and to make all processes more transparent. The guidelines for the School Action Plan and the Observation Handbook were revised and adapted to new developments.

This project also totally revised the procedures and instruments by which TVET schools measure the results of their SA process against the ARACIP indicators and 5-point-grading scale when completing the annual SA report. The revised procedures and instruments were introduced during the 6 training events (see activity 9.5) and were highly praised by participants.

In addition, the project drafted proposals for the further development of existing TVET schools networks and peer review partnerships.

Concept Paper about QA and Accreditation Mechanisms for TVET and HE (Please see introductory note above)

This activity required the project to elaborate a concept paper to explain and discuss the QA and accreditation mechanisms for TVET and HE in Romania as against the TVET QA Mechanisms and the two European Quality Assurance Frameworks for VET and HE.The accreditation of TVET schools falls under the remit of ARACIP; therefore, accreditation mechanisms are in place and approved through ministerial order, and initial VET providers have to meet the requirements of the ARACIP Authorisation and Accreditation Standards. Hence, ARACIP is responsible for writing about accreditation mechanisms for TVET providers.The process of self-assessment and improvement planning is, however, based on the TVET QA Mechanisms quality principles and criteria. The PHARE 2005 project drafted a concept paper on TVET QA Mechanisms and three annexes:Annex 1: TVET School NetworksAnnex 2: Peer Review PartnershipsAnnex 3: Guide to Building Peer Review PartnershipsThe concept paper explains the structure of the overall TVET QA Mechanisms and the link between the individual methodologies. The TVET QA Mechanisms in Romania include all three aspects of quality (assurance, external monitoring and evaluation, improvement); they have continuously been aligned with best European practice (EQARF-VET, EQF, and Peer Review Manuall) and will ensure the quality of TVET provision. However, the TVET QA Mechanisms also maintain Romanian values; for example, TVET will continue to be a school-based provision



incorporating generic skills and general learning along with vocational skills and knowledge. The key processes of the TVET QA Mechanisms are:

internal quality assurance processes

external monitoring by inspectorate

external evaluation by ARACIP

There are new responsibilities for public and private bodies - the State at national and county levels; social partners; professional associations; teachers, trainers, assessors, support staff, and learners. The part I concept paper outlines institutional responsibilities in relation to the TVET sector.Annex 1 deals with TVET school networks. A belief in the benefits of networks and collaboration infuses most European and governmental communications with both the public and VET stakeholders. The government, CNDIPT, and other agencies attach great importance to learning from effective networks to ensure high quality VET provision for all learners, and to underpin community cohesion.

In Romania, during the second year of piloting the TVET QA Mechanisms, the 20 original Pilot TVET Schools were allocated to 100 TVET schools in a “mentor” system. As the original pilot schools had already gone through the first self-assessment cycle, they could use their experience in advising TVET schools that had just joined the pilot phase. From this “mentor” system the Regional TVET Schools Networks devolved, and were formally approved by Ministerial Order no 4889/09.08.2006.Therefore, there has been some experience in Romania of TVET schools and other agencies working together to improve outcomes for learners. Focused on good quality collaboration between TVET schools and other stakeholders networking has proved an effective way to improve the delivery of services and raise standards of VET within communities. However; not all networks are working effectively as yet to the benefit of TVET schools. Therefore; this annex makes recommendations and outlines a TVET School Networks methodology to foster mutual learning and improvement, and to help with resourcing and strengthening the TVET school networks.Annex 2 focuses on Peer Review Partnerships. One particularly promising instrument of quality assurance and development is Peer Review – the external evaluation of TVET schools by Peers. Current European developments in quality assurance in VET also focus on peer review. The European Peer Review Manual23 for trans-national peer review, which was published in 2007 and is intended for initial VET, is going to be extended to other VET provision. The Romanian system of external monitoring could eventually be substituted by peer review and peer learning via TVET School Networks; although, the validation of VET providers’ self-assessment report and improvement plan should reside with the inspectorate or other suitable agencies (e.g. ARACIP)Annex 3 complements Annex 2 and suggests methodologies for the implementation of Peer Review Partnerships for TVET schools in Romania based on the TVET QA Mechanisms. Annex 3 gives an executive summary of peer review processes and provides TVET schools with a step-by-step guide to building peer review partnerships.As part of the concept paper development the project TVET-QA expert undertook a comparison of the achievements of TVET QA Mechanisms against the CQAF, EQARF, and EQF Quality Principles (see the comparison, achievement and

23 European Peer Review Manual for initial VET, Leonardo da Vinci Project, AT/04/C/F/TH-82000, 2007; www.peer-review-education.net



mapping tables produced by the project TVET-QA expert). From this analysis it is clear that Romania has already achieved 8 EQF Quality Principles and is working towards EQF Quality Principle 4. Although a formal body or agency has not as yet been appointed to carry out external evaluations of the external monitoring agencies (e.g. ARACIP, inspectorates, CNDIPT, etc.), first steps in this direction have already been implemented successfully by the PHARE 2005 and previous projects through the scrutiny of EM visit and SA reports and through the EM visit feedback questionnaire. The sustainability of the SA and EM visit procedures has been demonstrated through the ongoing successful implementation of both processes both at system and provider level. This will be further enhanced by the full implementation of the system level self-assessment procedure and process.

External Monitoring in TVET Schools and University Consortia and drafting of Audit Reports

As mentioned before (4.1 TVET Current Position) the external monitoring procedure was developed during the pilot phase in 2004 in order to have some control over TVET schools’ implementation of the self-assessment process. Hence, the external monitoring process is already well established, and trained inspectors are available to carry out this procedure. For more details on the strategy used, see chapter 8 below.The EM visits were carried out by the school inspectorates between 20 March and 6 May 2008 after the training and standardisation events (see activity 9.5). The calendar for EM visits was developed in agreement with TVET schools and in compliance with the period of time set by the MoERY. Although there are 1316 TVET schools operating in Romania, only 150 of them were assisted by the PHARE project, of which 50 schools are in rural areas. These 50 rural TVET schools were visited by PHARE project local experts.External monitors produce a written report after their visit, which is sent to the inspectorate. The visits to all 1316 TVET schools were monitored through the analysis of the external monitoring reports by local project experts. The PHARE project received 941 EM visit reports for analysis; this represents a return rate of 71.5%. In addition, some inspectorates forwarded their synthetic reports (4) or inspection reports (6), which were also analysed.

The analysis shows that during both the SA and the EM process little comparison is being made with national statistical data and still no use is being made of benchmarking. However, the EM visits as such were carried out effectively and in compliance with EM visit procedures. The results from the EM visit feedback questionnaires show a very high satisfaction rate of both TVET schools and their external monitors. TVET schools are now experienced in preparing for and conducting visits; they provided the requested documents and invited learners, teachers, parents, employers, and representatives of the Local Council and City Hall for interviews. Overall TVET schools do demonstrate that quality assurance and improvement matters to them, and they have registered progress compared to last year. More detailed results and learner feedback can be found in the Final External Monitoring Report 2007/2008.External monitoring is a system level quality assurance mechanism; and as part of quality control and improvement, the system level self-assessment process has to collect feedback from stakeholders regarding the impact of its QA mechanisms and instruments. Therefore; in addition, the PHARE 2005 project implemented a new feedback procedure. The purpose of the feedback questionnaire research was to understand the extent to which the EM visit, through its elements (visit plan,



observations, interviews, feedback, and visit report), has a guiding and supporting role for TVET schools when undertaking their self-assessment procesThe 150 PHARE assisted TVET schools and their inspectors/local experts were chosen as the target population for the feedback research; therefore, they were sent a feedback questionnaire to report on their experience of the external monitoring visits. The questionnaire covered issues from before, during, after, and between visits. With a return rate of 75% for TVET schools and 85.7% for external monitors the results are overwhelmingly positive: 99% of TVET schools and 98.8% of external monitors were overall satisfied with the EM visit process; and 81% of schools and 78.5% of external monitors were even more than satisfied (e.g. very satisfied + delighted). Only a few unsatisfactory issues were reported. More detailed results can be found in the Evaluation Report on EM Visit Feedback 2007/2008.External monitoring also includes the process of validating TVET schools’ self-assessment reports (SARs) and improvement plans (IPs). For this purpose the SARs and IPs of 1316 TVET schools were also analysed by local project experts. The results of this analysis will be available at the end of October and can be found in the Final Self-Assessment Report 2007/2008.Therefore, for the evaluation and monitoring of the adoption of the instruments of quality assurance (like self-assessment and inspection manuals) in the entire VET system and of the progress of QA activities, the external monitoring visit reports, the feedback questionnaires, and the self-assessment reports were used. In addition, the analysis of the EM visit reports and the feedback research are steps towards the implementation of the EQF quality principle 4: “External monitoring bodies or agencies carrying out quality assurance should themselves be subject to regular review”.Again the PHARE 2005 project has successfully contributed to the dissemination, progress, and sustainability of the implementation of TVET QA Mechanisms in the whole TVET sector during the academic year 2007/2008.

Training for Quality Assurance Coordinators in TVET Schools

The 1316 TVET schools are already implementing self-assessment against the 7 quality principles of the TVET QA Mechanisms (3rd edition, 2007). Although quality coordinators have been previously trained, it is essential that their competences are continuously being enhanced. Furthermore, the self-assessment process needs to be standardised across TVET schools and good practice needs to be shared, especially regarding the writing of the self-assessment report and making judgments about evidence. The same issues apply to the continuous development of those professionals undertaking external monitoring activities.Under activity 9.5 the project was expected to organise 5 training sessions at 2 days per session for a total of around 150 persons acting as quality coordinators in 150 TVET schools aimed at enhancing their competence for internal and external monitoring and self-assessment of the 150 TVET schools. However, external monitoring activities are mainly carried out by the inspectorates with the help of only a few TVET school directors or quality coordinators. Furthermore, ARACIP external evaluators have to judge TVET schools’ SA process, which was carried out according to TVET QA Mechanisms, against the ARACIP indicators and 5-point grading scale. For ARACIP external evaluators to be able to make fair judgements they had to develop a common understanding and interpretation of the TVET QA Mechanism standards. Therefore, it was essential to ensure that all stakeholders using the new frameworks and regulations attended standardisation events.



The PHARE 2005 project implemented 6 training events for 240 participants of which 227 attended (13 absentees) over 3 weeks in Sinaia during March 2008. Participants were drawn from the following categories:

quality assurance coordinators from the 100 Phare 2004-2006 schools (3 events for 100 delegates of which 97 attended)

quality coordinators from the 50 Phare rural schools 2004 – 2006 schools (1 event for 50 delegates of which all attended)

regional technical inspectors (1 event for 43 delegates of which 43 attended)

external evaluators from ARACIP and other inspectors (1 event for 47 delegates of which 37 attended)

The training events for quality coordinators focused on TVET QA Mechanisms through the self-assessment process; whereas the training events for inspectors and external evaluators concentrated on the external monitoring procedure. All training events covered identifying valid evidence for the performance descriptors, making judgements about evidence, writing the self-assessment or external monitoring report, and grading the results from the self-assessment process against the ARACIP indicators and 5-point grading scale. Especially the totally revised procedures and instruments for measuring results from the SA process against the ARACIP indicators and 5-point grading scale were introduced and found very useful. Delegates appreciated the authentic exercises and found the revised procedure easy to carry out and the revised instruments easy to use. In particular the ARACIP representatives attending the training event highly praised the solutions for developing an understanding and practical ability for judging evidence. The events were participative using real examples from previous years for the exercises; they were highly successful in their outcomes, and very well received by participants. For each training event participants completed evaluation sheets which were analysed by the local experts’ team leader who also wrote the report; for more detail please see the six Training Evaluation Reports. For the purpose of sustainability and further dissemination all training material was provided on CD and in hard-copy so that localised training events can be carried out by TVET schools and inspectorates.

TVET Strategy for Completion and Local Experts

The strategies have already been addressed in chapter 7 above, which contains a description of Task 9 activities and actions that were taken to complete these activities successfully. Additional strategies used were meetings and discussions with relevant stakeholders and experts at the system level; especially with CNFPA and GNAC. Particularly the discussions with CNFPA regarding the evaluation of current QA mechanisms in Romania carried out by CNFPA, and regarding CNFPA’s recommendations for the further development of common QA principles and mechanisms in VET, led to the acceptance that VET QA mechanisms in Romania should be based on EQARF and on the EQF Quality Principles (Annex 3). It was agreed that Romania has already implemented or worked towards 8 of the 9 EQF Quality Principles; and that only quality assurance of external audit agencies and self-assessment on the system level have to be further developed. However, by evaluating all 1316 EM visit reports and all 1316 SA reports the TVET sector is already implementing a quality assurance mechanism of external auditing bodies; and this PHARE 2005 project made another major step in this direction by



implementing the new EM visit feedback questionnaire procedure. Furthermore, the project has devised instruments based on the EQARF for the self-assessment procedure for the system level.Dissemination and sustainability strategies were implemented through the thematic seminar in June and the conferences in May and October during which the QA workshops and presentations enabled delegates to discuss the QA issues at hand and define recommendations for further developments. This discussion was further enhanced by three QA articles which appeared in the project dissemination newsletters.In total 10 experienced local QA experts (QSTEs) were deployed mainly for Activity 9.4. They carried out external monitoring visits (8 experts), wrote EM visit reports, completed feedback questionnaires, and analysed 914 external monitoring reports in June/July 2008 and self-assessment reports in September/October 2008 (9 experts). Terms of Reference for the Local QA Experts were established and disseminated. The Local QA Experts’ team leader (QSTE TL) was allocated additional days for coordinating 150 EM visits and the work of the other local QA experts, for providing guidance and support where necessary, and for preparing draft audit reports, including analysis of the feedback questionnaires. The EM and SA report and key performance indicators (KPIs) analysis process was standardised through the use of checklists which were discussed and agreed by the local experts and a CNDIPT representative during two seminars, in March and June 2008. During the seminars, which were coordinated by the international expert of the PHARE project, delegates also developed a common understanding for the evaluation of results. All experts had to produce summary checklists of their results, which were compiled into two overall draft reports by the team leader. Results can be found in the final audit reports that were produced for Activity 9.4 (Final EM Report; Evaluation Report on EM Visit Feedback; Final SA Report).

TVET Outcomes

The Terms of Reference stipulated three main objectives for TVET Task 9:Objective 9.1 revise the pilot versions of the self-assessment and inspection manuals for TVET that are in use at the national level for the 150 TVET schools and 42 county inspectoratesObjective 9.3 elaborate a concept paper to explain and discuss the QA and accreditation mechanism for TVET in Romania as against the National Quality Assurance Framework (TVET QA MECHANISMS) and the two European Quality Assurance Frameworks (EQAF) for HE and VETObjective 9.4 conduct external monitoring in TVET schoolsFor the TVET sector all objectives were achieved Objective 9.2 revise in consultation with universities the Quality Guidebook for HE, elaborated through the CALISRO project

Objective 9.3 elaborate a concept paper to explain and discuss the QA and accreditation mechanism for TVET and HE in Romania as against the National Quality Assurance Framework (TVET QA MECHANISMS) and the two European Quality Assurance Frameworks (EQAF) for HE and VET

Objective 9.4 conduct external monitoring in TVET schools and the 8 university consortia to assess the progress of QA activities and draft audit reports

Indicators of Achievement

TVET Indicators of Achievement



There were four main outputs for TVET:Output 9.1 revised self-assessment and inspection manuals for TVETOutput 9.3 concept paper on QA and Accreditation Mechanisms for TVET and HEOutput 9.4 external monitoring visits carried out to the 150 TVET schools and the universities comprising the 8 consortiaOutput 9.5 5 training sessions of minimum 2 days/session for 150 quality assurance coordinators of 150 TVET schoolsFor the TVET sector all four outputs were produced with a very high success rate.

There were four main outputs for HE:Output 9.2 revised Quality Guidebook for HEOutput 9.3 concept paper on QA and accreditation Mechanisms for TVET and HEOutput 9.4 external monitoring visits carried out to the 150 TVET schools and the universities comprising the 8 consortiaOutput 9.6 1 training session of 3 days minimum for at least 24 persons responsible for QA in each university of those included in the 8 consortia

Means of Achievement

TVET Means of Achievement

The means for achievement have already been addressed above, with a description of Task 9 activities and actions that have been taken to complete these activities. The project could only achieve the objectives of Task 9 in collaboration with CNDIPT and other relevant stakeholder, eg inspectorates and ARACIP.9.1 Together with CNDIPT and CNFPA the project agreed that QA mechanisms in Romania need to be based on EQARF and on the EQF Quality Principle (Annex 3).9.3 Draft versions of concept paper and its Annexes were written during the summer, and finalised towards the end of the project as much depended on the results of activities 9.1 and 9.4. 9.4 External monitoring visits were carried out to 1316 TVET schools by inspectors and local project experts previously trained in external monitoring procedures. The ToR stipulated visits to only 150 TVET schools; but, as TVET QA Mechanisms were rolled out to 1316 TVET schools during the previous project, guidance and support had to be provided to all TVET schools. Emphasis was put on the 1st visit for which the period has been extended to between March and May 2008. The analysis of the implementation of external monitoring and self-assessment procedures and instruments throughout the TVET sector was undertaken by local QA experts.9.5 The 6 training events at 2-day sessions each for 150 quality assurance coordinators, 43 technical inspectors, and 47 external evaluators (ARACIP) were conducted over 3 weeks early in March 2008. This did not prevent TVET schools and inspectors experienced in implementing TVET QA Mechanisms to start with the self-assessment process and support visits in February.

Timetable of Achievement

TVET TimetableThe activities as outlined below were carried out between November 2007 and November 2008 during the life of the PHARE 2005 project. All activities had highly successful outcomes.



Activity Month Comment9.3 concept November inception report concept paper for

task 99.5 training9.1 revision

January preparation of training materialtraining needs analysis meetings with PIUapproval by PIU of English versionrevision of some performance descriptors and other procedures

9.5 training9.1 revision

February translation and printingapproval by PIU of Romanian version start of support and guidance visits by inspectorsrevision of some performance descriptors and other procedures

9.5 training9.4 monitoring

March 6 training sessions @ 2 days over 3 weekssupport and guidance visits by inspectors and local experts

9.4 monitoring9.3 concept

April support and guidance visits by inspectors and local expertsconference concept paper

9.4 monitoring

May support and guidance visits by inspectors and local expertsmeetings with CNFPA and GNAC


June visit feedback collectedexternal monitoring analysis by local expertsconcept paper QA Mechanisms


July visit feedback collectedvisit feedback analysis and reportexternal monitoring analysis by local expertsconcept paper Annex 2 TVET School Networksconcept paper Annex 2 Peer Review

9.4 monitoring

August draft EM analysis report by local expert team leadervisit feedback analysis and report


September self-assessment (SAR) analysis by local expertsconcept papers final versionsfinal EM report 2007/2008final evaluation report on EM visit feedbackconcept paper Annex 3 Guide to Partnerships


October draft SA analysis report by local expert team leaderfinal SA report 2007/2008concept papers final versions



Activity Month Commentfinal conference concept paper final task 9 report

TVET Impact of Completed Task

There are a number of conclusions that were drawn from the evaluation of the implementation of the self-assessment and external monitoring process by TVET schools during the PHARE 2005 project. The conclusion to be drawn as a result of the analysis of feedback questionnaires is that the external monitoring visit has an actual supporting and counselling role for TVET schools. Overall external monitors believe that the monitoring visits are useful for TVET schools. They are also delighted about the implementation of the questionnaire („Thank you for asking for our opinions and for the fact that you take into consideration our words”).The unsatisfactory aspects of the external monitoring process concern mostly system level administrative issues, like the timing of visits and reimbursement of expenses. Although external monitors and TVET schools can draw on system level support (CNDIPT) regarding external monitoring visits, this needs to be extended and formalised, so that TVET schools and external monitors receive the support they require before, during, after, and between visits.A more important concern is that the role of the quality coordinator is still not fully and formally recognized at system level; and that, as “the responsibilities of the quality coordinator are numerous and important; and their fulfilment at optimal level requires a great deal of time, (….) it is necessary to reduce their teaching load”. Of some significance also is the comment that not all ARACIP external evaluators are aware of the TVET QA Mechanisms; and therefore, do not apply these during their external evaluation visits. Of course, the approval of TVET schools and programmes is undertaken against the ARACIP authorisation and accreditation standards; however, TVET schools carry out the self-assessment process against the TVET QA Mechanisms and then measure and grade the self-assessment results against the ARACIP indicators and 5-point scale. ARACIP external evaluators have to take this into consideration when making their judgements.The results demonstrate clearly that the external monitoring procedures, coordinated at the inspectorate level who provide permanent assistance to TVET schools should continue. This would also require that regular (annual) standardisation training events have to be formalised and become a part of the system level QA mechanisms for the TVET sector and its stakeholders. External monitors and ARACIP external evaluators require ongoing training, support, and guidance, so they in turn can disseminate information effectively to TVET schools, and provide training and guidance to quality coordinators and other staff responsible for quality assurance.From a system level point of view EM visits contribute to a more thorough knowledge and understanding of the issues confronting TVET schools in their implementation of quality assurance mechanisms. The feedback acquired from quality coordinators and directors during the visit and from external monitors in the visit report has an important role in clarifying existing situations that need to be remedied and improved.In conclusion, the overall positive feedback regarding the external monitoring process would suggest that the approach should be further enhanced and resourced at the system level, so that TVET schools receive the necessary support in their own endeavours in establishing TVET school networks and peer review.The overall positive impact of the completed TVET Task 9 is evident in the successful implementation of SA and EM procedures in the TVET sector, as well



as the enhanced sustainability of these procedures and the improved alignment to European developments.

Recommendations for Medium- and Long-Term Actions

TVET Recommendations

This section summarises outstanding issues both at system and provider level. The following recommendations are a result of the evaluation of the implementation of the self-assessment process by TVET schools during the academic year 2007/2008.Quality assurance for each function in the system requires appropriate benchmarks and national key performance indicators (KPIs) in statistical form to be identified. Generally this will mean organisations setting standards according to national objectives of the overall VET system and taking steps to maintain, measure, review, and improve these standards. The organisations responsible for the different functions will also set criteria and devise procedures for the application of the relevant standards through the use of accreditation, validation, and evaluation methodologies. Romania so far has developed the first strand of the EQARF-VET by implementing the TVET QA Mechanisms, and considerable advances have been made in setting up external monitoring procedures. However, the third strand of the EQARF-VET still needs to be further improved. A national discussion needs to take place as to what mechanisms should be developed to ensure consistency of VET provision and services across different sectors, different regions, and different providers. It is important to identify appropriate external audit mechanisms on a national level that allow for collecting and analysing relevant data, and for elaborating monitoring reports that would help in gaining insight into the quality of VET provision and services in Romania.TVET schools face a number of difficulties when applying the self-assessment process; for example, the lack of useful quantitative information regarding key performance indicators on the national database; and the difficulties in collecting this data in the first place. TVET schools do not have appropriate registration tools and information systems with which to record the necessary data, nor do they have suitable software with which to carry out an effective analysis that would produce data in a reliable, objective, timely, comprehensive, and user-friendly mannerKPIs are an important part of current European strategies, but are notoriously difficult to set up; and a lack of suitable means for data collection is a main barrier. KPIs should cover areas of hard data such as success rates, drop-out rates, acquisition of basic skills, acquisition of key competences, qualifications achieved at different levels, participation in adult learning, and progression, together with areas of soft data such as learner and employer satisfaction with provision, social partner engagement, and public views of the system. Broader factors have to be taken account of as well, such as cost-effectiveness, the effects of economic and technological change on the system and on stakeholders’ expectations, and the effects of government policy.

Effective national information systems and databases will be established by ARACIP to provide opportunities for TVET schools and other stakeholders to learn from good practice through published guides, reports, benchmarks (e.g. learner achievement rates), and case studies. A date should be set by which all TVET schools will have access to these databases to allow them to compare their own performance in key areas with national data in order to identify priority areas for improvement. The database of key performance indicators and the annual report on quality will also be published by ARACIP.



The external perspective will enable TVET schools to benchmark their performances against those of their local, regional, national, and international peers. Benchmarking requires the identification of appropriate key indicators against which performance can be measured. The production of relevant management information and measurement against national and international key indicators should become an accepted part of the national quality assurance system. Regular national training and standardisation events should be instigated for collecting and disseminating information and feedback. It is important that training and standardisation exercises for those involved in QA activities continue. Where the dissemination of QA training is concerned monitoring procedures need to be established so that these dissemination training events may be checked and reviewed from time to time to avoid dilution and misrepresentation of content and information.Regular standardisation exercises are essential for the continuing professional development (CPD) of inspectors, external evaluators, quality coordinators, internal monitors, and assessors. CPD must include standards and assessment (e.g. observation and appraisal) of staff performance. Teachers and trainers should be encouraged to practice team-work at both TVET school level and inter-assistance networks. TVET schools must strengthen school-enterprise cooperation for work-based learning of learners, teachers, and trainers.Where teachers are part of the QA Commission or otherwise in charge of quality activities they need training to enable them to develop QA specific documentation and processes. Teachers with responsibility for specific QA activities should have reduced teaching hours; this applies particularly to the quality coordinator. Regular/annual training events for TVET schools’ directors, quality coordinators, teachers/trainers, employers, parents, and learners should be put into place.

HE1. INTRODUCTION

This TVET24 project, financed under the PHARE25 2005 allocation had a special focus on the sustainability of results from the previous three-year reform cycle of 2001-2003, and of achievements from the PHARE 2004 programme. The present project was the second phase and aimed particularly at continuing the correlation to higher education developments which has started during the previous project.

The specific results of PHARE 2005 were targeted at consolidating the impact of reforms and integrating the quality assurance frameworks of both TVET and HE. Therefore, Task 9 combined activities for both the TVET and HE sector.

2. BACKGROUNDThe rapid process of democratisation of Romanian society in early 90’s of

the 20th century was accompanied by unprecedented growth of the higher education sector. Increased demand for higher education in that period was met by a growing institutional provision. The system expanded both in terms of student numbers and institutions. A private sector higher education has appeared and in a diversified system the need for legal reforms was widely recognised. In that period

24 TVET = Technical Vocational Education & Training25 PHARE = Poland and Hungary Assistance for Restructuring of their Economies



university autonomy and academic freedom have been reinstated through changes in university statutes and the remote control of the state was introduced through accreditation (1993) as a mechanism for external quality steering. The first accreditation body- National Council on Academic Evaluation and Accreditation (CNEAA) was established in 1994 and its accreditation decisions were based on external evaluation of higher education institutions and programmes for compliance with a set of predominantly input standards. It was one of the earliest bodies of its kind in Central and Eastern Europe and was intended to respond to the mushrooming of private higher education initiatives which had taken place in the early years of the post-communist period.

A decade of accreditation experience in Romanian higher education system had proved the importance of a national independent body to held universities responsible and accountable for their internal activities. University management was transformed, following modern approaches to university management and strategic planning process was widely implemented. As part of their preparation for meeting CNEAA expectations, universities adopted self-evaluation process and feedback mechanisms as important component of their internal quality assurance.

At the same time CNEAA accreditation approach was considered less effective in terms of development of universities quality culture and mechanisms for internal monitoring and improvement of teaching and research. The need for change in the approach to the quality assurance of higher education provision has become pressing with the legal promotion of the Bologna process in 2004 and the adoption of the Bologna structure of Bachelor, Master and Doctoral studies in 2005.

With the adoption of the Law 87/2006 on quality in education and the Government Decision No. 1418/2006 CNEAA ceased its activities and a new agency – ARACIS- was established as its successor. The 2006 law provides a modern approach to quality assurance across Romanian education, with complementary operations between pre-university (schools) and higher education sectors and a greater focus on quality assurance and learning outcomes. The accreditation function of ARACIS is maintained as part of a broader quality assurance and improvement methodology, to ensure initial compliance with minimum standards and progressive quality enhancement.

The new quality assurance methodology developed by ARACIS displays a shift to student-centred approach in quality assurance and a clear preoccupation with the European Standards and Guidelines adopted at the Bergen ministerial conference in 2005. It was piloted in 2006- 2007 and submitted to external monitoring by a committee made up of independent Romanian experts. They reported their findings in September 2007 and pointed to a major shift from evaluation of compliance and input –based standards towards a fitness for purpose approach to quality and outcomes based evaluation. With the new legislation which provides clarity and adds credibility and authority to ARACIS’ activities, the new system for quality assurance received an impetus for rapidly moving ahead.

Despite the immediate and far reaching changes which Romanian higher education is undergoing in the recent years, the quality assurance system is still facing a number of major challenges.

One such challenge is the complex and multi-layer legislation itself. The legislative basis for accreditation in Romania is subject to multiple changes, which increases its complexity in terms of different agencies, roles and responsibilities. The importance of maintaining close links between relevant agencies and bodies is



crucial for achieving the goals and objectives of the present reform. It is vital that close cooperation between ARACIS and ACPART, as well as other relevant bodies is maintained and that scope for grater coherence and synergies between their policies be identified.

Another challenge is the very detailed and extensive legislation for quality, which can be positive in supporting the system in its early years, but can also lead to difficulties for both universities’ and ARACIS’ activities through not being responsive and flexible enough. A too detailed legislative framework for quality assurance can therefore also become a constraint in an improvement-oriented approach.

The demographic factor puts further pressures on the system with the expected 40% drop of the 18-25 age cohort between 2005 and 2020. This involves an inevitable reduction in first time or traditional higher education learners and invites rapid and relevant response on the part of universities, including an increased focus on lifelong learning in its different forms, greater transparency of the university teaching quality to students and employers through the alignment of study programmes to the new qualifications framework and effective arrangements for the recognition of prior learning.

As lifelong learning requires greater attention of universities to learning outcomes and competences, universities are expected to introduce relevant changes into their approach to quality assurance and improvement of study programmes, the latter being subject to alignment with level and core subject descriptors from the national qualifications framework. Lack of sufficient knowledge and experience in understanding and implementing the learning outcomes approach proves to be yet another obstacle to the full engagement of Romanian universities with lifelong learning arrangements. This unfavourable situation is reinforced by the inherited from the past accreditation method culture of compliance to external requirements.

3. EUROPEAN CONTEXTAfter the Berlin meeting of the ministers of Bologna signatory countries

(2003) Quality assurance has become a key priority of the Bologna process which influences to a great extent both the Introduction of the three cycle system (bachelor/master/doctorate), and recognition of qualifications and periods of study. All across Europe, countries and universities are engaged in a process of modernization and the introduction of quality assurance systems by universities and external quality assurance bodies has become a landmark for it. From an EU perspective, these reforms are part of the Lisbon Strategy for Growth and Jobs, which also encompasses reinforced cooperation in vocational education and training (Copenhagen Process). To establish synergies between Copenhagen and Bologna, the Commission has brought forward its proposal for the European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning (EQF) . This is linked to and supported by other initiatives in the fields of transparency of qualifications (EUROPASS), credit transfer (ECTS -ECVET) and quality assurance (ENQA -ENQAVET).

The Berlin communiqué set as a priority for the higher education systems across Europe to define “qualifications in terms of workload, level, learning


http://www.trainingvillage.gr/etv/Projects_Networks/quality/

http://www.enqa.eu/

http://ec.europa.eu/education/ecvt/index_en.html

http://ec.europa.eu/education/programmes/socrates/ects/index_en.html

http://europass.cedefop.europa.eu/europass/preview.action?locale_id=3



http://ec.europa.eu/education/copenhagen/index_en.html

http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/


outcomes, competences and profile”.26 Thus the topic of competence-based approach was introduced in the curricular reform agenda. At international level it led to the development of the Dublin descriptors and the 8 levels of the European Qualifications Framework. At the national level competences have been used in many countries as building blocks of their national qualifications frameworks. They also play a role in the quality assurance procedures and are related to yet another aspect of the Bologna process, the credit accumulation and transfer systems. As a recent study on the situation across Europe reveals, there are no clear signs yet of either a full development of national qualifications framework in line with the EQF, or the full implementation of a qualification framework.27 Only a few systems are, so far, very actively engaged in qualification frameworks and changing their curricula in terms of competences.

The competence-based approach has received additional boost at the next Ministerial meeting in Bergen (2005), with the approval of the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Higher Education. There the learning outcomes approach has been legitimized through the guidelines to standard 2.3.3 for the internal quality assurance of students’ assessment and through standard 2.4.1 for the external quality assurance.28 The implementation of the ESG at the national level is a prerequisite for ENQA membership and for a subsequent inclusion into the European Quality Assurance Register of the quality assurance agencies.

In Romania, ARACIS is a candidate member of ENQA (European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education) since 2007 and a member of the Central and East European Network of Quality Assurance agencies (CEE Network). The agency was created after the adoption of the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance, which allowed for further engagement with European quality assurance mechanisms when drafting and implementing its methodology. ARACIS has actively promoted and followed the quality developments under the Bologna process and in 2007 was selected to take part in the Quality Assurance Project (QAHECA) of the European Universities’ Association, which plays a crucial role in embedding of Romanian higher education in the European Higher Education Area. In 2008 the Agency was audited by two authoritative international organizations: the European University Association and the European Union of Students, as part of its arrangements for becoming a full ENQA member and a registered agency in EQAR in 2009.

A number of Romanian higher education institutions have participated in the major European quality assurance activities, including institutional evaluation through EUA Institutional Evaluation Programme and the Quality Culture Project.

4. CURRENT POSITION

26 Berlin Communiqué (2003). Realising the European Higher Education Area. Communiqué of the Conference of European Ministers responsible for higher education. Berlin.

27 The extent and impact of higher education curricular reform across Europe. Final Report to the DG Education and Culture of the European Commission, 2007.28 Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area. 2nd edition, Helsinki, Finland, 2007. ENQA.



The legal framework for quality assurance in higher education have been established and quality assurance processes and procedures are being put in place at system level.

With the constitution of ARACIS and the measures adopted for the development of the National Framework of Qualifications, Romanian universities take action for improving the quality of the higher education programmes they deliver to their students. A key element to this self-improvement process is the objectivity of the self-review and the capability of universities to critically reflect on their internal practices. This requires a shift to evaluation of student achievement and a more systematic use of measurement intervals and level descriptors. The reference criteria and indicators of performance proposed in ARACIS’ methodology need further refinement in order to offer guidance and support to universities on this particular issue.

This topic has been addressed to some extent by the previous PHARE 2004 Project, which sampled the new quality assurance methodology at programme and institution level into a number of universities and programmes. With the cross-reference to the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ESG) as a main point of departure for the analysis of the implementation of ARACIS methodology, the project provided training for 50 internal and 50 external evaluators and contributed to an independent review of the agency method. The work of the previous VET IV Project in the field of quality assurance in higher education led also to the development of a set of recommendations for universities regarding the improvement of their own internal quality procedures and initial guidance on revising their programmes using the Learning Outcomes approach. The specific results of the Project and the documents prepared (e.g., “How to write Learning Outcomes”, “Guidelines for Defining Qualification Profiles”, “What is DACUM?”) relate to the quality developments in the TVET sector and provide grounds for further correlation between the quality arrangements in the two sectors.

Under the present task 9 of the TVET V Project, these developments are strengthened by sections on programme design and evaluation in the revised quality Guidebook which provide point for departure to universities in their efforts to develop and implement quality assurance mechanisms that align programmes with the national qualification frameworks.

5. STAKEHOLDER ANALYSISThere are three major stakeholders in HE quality assurance. The following are the most prominent regarding quality:

o Higher education institutions; o ARACIS;



o Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports.

Under the Romanian legislation (Article 17 (1-b) of the Law), ARACIS is the national body competent to propose authorisation of new programmes and institutions and their subsequent accreditation. For external evaluations of quality assurance, however, Romanian universities may also apply to other institutions. Article 23 (1) of the Law stipulates that accredited institutions may seek external periodic assessment of their quality either from ARACIS or from any other quality assurance agency, national or international, which is included in the European Quality Assurance Registry (EQAR).

ARACIS is an independent quality assurance agency for higher education. In the light of this statute, its mission consists in providing services in this field both for HEIs and the Education Ministry. A synoptic table provides a compendium of the distribution of the main responsibilities for each of these institutions.

The responsibilities of ARACIS include:

Develops and proposes to the Ministry of Education the Draft Methodology for quality assurance in higher education and accreditation standards for various types of programmes and providers of higher education; this Methodology is the basis for the external evaluation of HEI and of the study programmes in the authorization, accreditation or periodical evaluation programmes; Applies the policy of the Ministry of Education concerning quality assurance in higher education; Provides external evaluation, at request or at one’s own initiative, and proposes to the Ministry of Education the authorization and the accreditation respectively of the providers of higher education and study programmes in view of developing the adequate laws; Develops and revises periodically, based on good practice and European and global benchmarking procedures, the national reference standards for quality assurance and (self-)assessment; Develops periodically, every three years, a report on the quality status in higher education sector in Romania;



Publishes manuals, guides, summaries of good practice and any other instruments useful to HEIs for quality assurance.

Ministry of Education, Research and Youth:

Develops public policies for quality assurance; Develops decisions (ministerial orders) or proposes Government Decisions (for instance: „list of Bachelor’s specializations”, accreditation of some Master’s study programmes or authorization/accreditation of some Bachelor’s study programmes), and draft laws (of institutional accreditation) based on the proposals made by ARACIS respectively; Proposes the Government legislative initiatives for quality assurance, which are submitted to the Parliament for adoption; May finance from public funds institutional or systemic quality assurance projects; Proposes the Government the Draft Methodology for quality assurance in higher education, developed by ARACIS, in view of adopting it by Government Decision and turning it into a law; Takes note periodically of the ARACIS report (every 3 months) concerning the status of quality in higher education and develops public policies accordingly; Ensures through the National Authority for Scientific Research (NASR) the acknowledgment or accreditation of HEIs as research institutions.

Higher Education Institution

Establishes, under the management of the rector, an institutional Commission responsible for quality assurance (e.g. self-assessment, institutional quality assurance and benchmarking policy, development of quality culture etc); Develops autonomously institutional quality assurance policies focused on learning outcomes and on research and development outcomes of a quality specific culture;



For periodical evaluation of institutional quality, HEI can resort to any agency included in the European Quality Assurance Register; When following periodical institutional evaluation by ARACIS or another European agency included in the European Quality Assurance Register (EQAR) was evaluated with a „high degree of confidence”, that HEI is autonomous in the design and development of the Master’s programmes; May propose to ARACIS new Bachelor’s, Master’s and PhD programmes for provisional authorization and accreditation.

These institutions have different ‘stake’ in various quality assurance and accreditation procedures:

(a) Institution authorization/accreditation process:

HEI proposes a new study programme and contracts authorization/accreditation with ARACIS;

Based on the contractual relation, ARACIS proceeds with the external evaluation of quality;

The result of the ARACIS evaluation is submitted to the Ministry of Education, which may request additional information from ARACIS, if necessary;

Finally, the Ministry of Education develops the draft law of authorization/accreditation concerning the respective study programme or HEI, based on ARACIS recommendation.

(b) In the periodical evaluation of the quality of higher education services:

Periodical evaluation of accredited HEI should be one of the main objectives of the reform. Unfortunately, only a limited number of institutions were involved



under the pilot scheme of Methodology of ARACIS, and it is estimated for the period of 2008-2011 to evaluate about 45 HEIs;It needs to be mentioned that the periodical external evaluation of programme quality is legally aimed only at already accredited HEIs. On this occasion, only 20% of the study programmes are subject to external evaluation.

Within the 5 year interval, which is specified in the Law, a HEI should address a quality assurance agency included in the European Quality Assurance Register, for external evaluation of its quality assurance. If, following the external evaluation of quality, the respective HEI faces major difficulties that require remedy measures, it is given under the Law one year of grace for the application of the respective remedy measures. If in the one year period for improvement; if an improvement does not take place, that HEI loses its statute of „accredited HEI” and ARACIS recommends its dissolution.

The relation between ARACIS and HEI in the field of the periodical external evaluation of quality is a contractual relation; HEI pays from its own funds for the external quality evaluation service provided by ARACIS.

Following the external evaluation, ARACIS publishes the external evaluation report and informs the Ministry of Education about the results of the evaluation, in particular about the final qualificative of the evaluation. In case this qualificative is „high degree of confidence”, HEI obtains autonomy in the design and development of its own Master’s and PhD programmes, without the accreditation of the respective programmes by ARACIS being required.

In addition, another agency has a stake in quality assurance at programme level – ACPART. The National Agency for Higher Education Qualifications is the institution empowered to develop, implement and update the national framework for higher education qualifications. It also elaborates a methodology for approval of new programmes as well as of the existing ones on the basis of compatibility of curricula and qualification awards with the national qualification frameworks.29 The present distribution of responsibilities between ACPART and ARACIS calls for a further policy clarification regarding the relationship between the initial programme accreditation (provisional authorisation) and the recognition of qualification, as well as between the recognition of the new qualification and its validation by ACPART. This concerns also to a great extent universities’ responsibilities in re-defining their programmes and awards in line with the new qualifications framework and establishing proper links to the arrangements for monitoring students’ progress and achievements.

29 Decision No. 1.357 from November 3, 2005 on the establishment, the organization and the functioning of the National Agency for Qualifications in Higher Education and Partnership with the Economic and Social Environment – ACPART. Published in the Official Journal no. 1029/21 Nov. 2005.



6. TASK DESCRIPTIONThe task for the higher education component of Activity 9 of this VET V project is to build on the developed quality assurance structures and methodologies by revision and updating existing Quality Assurance guides and manuals for higher education and development of a Concept Paper on QA and accreditation mechanisms for HE. In addition, 30 quality coordinators and higher education staff with responsibilities in internal quality assurance were trained for their new roles, and received guidance in preparing and maintaining external monitoring visits to universities belonging to the university consortia.

7. TASK ACTIVITIES

Activity 9.2: Revision of the Quality Guidebook for higher education

Following the Bologna process and the present ARACIS policy for external evaluation, each university in Romania has the responsibility to develop autonomously its own quality assurance system with associated manuals and guides. The university autonomy in this case is considered to be conditional in the sense that internal quality assurance and procedures should respect the level of externality in view of the standards and guidelines for external quality assurance proposed by ARACIS. To provide consistency in the university quality approaches to certain key quality issues (e.g., programme quality assurance, based on learning outcomes approach, etc.) it was considered relevant to have a common code of good practice in a certain area, or a common quality guide.

The revision of the Guidebook aimed at ensuring that universities will have the necessary practice-oriented assistance to catch up with the external expectations (both national and international) towards their internal quality processes and procedures. Up to date issues have been identified through the development of a questionnaire for quality coordinators in universities belonging to the 8 university consortia and addressed in the Revised Quality Guide. The 66 responses received together with Interviews with 16 university managers and staff responsible for quality assurance have helped to identify good practices in quality assurance of higher education institutions, which are included in the Revised Quality Guide.

Activity 9.3: Concept Paper about QA and Accreditation Mechanisms for higher education in Romania

Under this activity a concept paper was developed explaining and discussing QA and accreditation mechanisms for higher education in the context of the national QA framework and the ESG. The analysis reveals the achievements of Romanian higher education in its long transition from an elite to a mass higher education system and points to the major challenges before quality assurance framework. The paper considers the implementation of the main roles and responsibilities of the quality assurance agency- ARACIS- and stresses on the opportunities for development of a new quality culture at the higher education institutions and the appearance of a new generation of internal and external evaluators.



The analysis reveals at the same time legal and methodological shortcomings and proposes a number of changes in the legislation as well as in coordination of activities between different stakeholders in quality assurance.

Activity 9.4: External Monitoring in university consortia and drafting of evaluation reports

Under this activity 7 external evaluation visits to higher education institutions from the eight university consortia took place. The planning of the visits and the monitoring process took place under the close supervision of ARACIS. External evaluation process has been already established by ARACIS and internal and external experts trained under the previous VET 4 Project. The monitoring visits under this TVET 5 project activity aimed at clarifying the role of quality coordinator in preparing for the external visit and the use of annual evaluation reports on education quality as a background for discussions between the external experts and higher education representatives. In addition, the monitoring exercise provided opportunities for ARACIS to offer guidance and support for universities to prepare for the external visits. The monitoring reports, produced by the local short-term experts, revealed that there is a room for improvement and stressed the need for a greater attention on the part of both universities and ARACIS to the structure and content of the annual reports and guidance for the preparation of their quality performance portfolio in a systematic and credible way.

Activity 9.6: Training for QA Coordinators from the 8 university consortia

Under this activity 30 quality assurance coordinators and representatives from the 8 university consortia had the opportunity to further develop their competences in assuring and enhancing the quality in their own institutional settings. The agenda and the method of the training were set to help in carrying out internal quality assurance activities in concert with external requirements for evaluation and accreditation, and in validating self-evaluation reports submitted to ARACIS for authorision and accreditation.One of the main achievements of the training seminar dealt with the development of teaching and learning quality amanagement strategies by quality coordinators based on existing institutional strategies. Another achievement was the development during plenary discussions and workshops of a basic model for programme development using learning outcomes approach. Guided by the model, workshop activities ended up with a step-by-step course review process for graduate attributes, which was discussed from all the participants. The last step- how to document the course review process in order to meet both requirements for recognition of qualification by ACPART and for quality assurance and accreditation by ARACIS was debated at length. The seminar on implementation of effective quality assurance systems provided additional opportunity for reflecting on and sharing good practices in quality assurance, with particular focus on university arrangements for implementing learning outcomes approach to the design of teaching and assessment of students. Participants suggested as a follow-up to the seminar to set up an Internet forum in ‘Yahoo’, where quality issues can be discussed and good practice exchanged between quality coordinators and other university staff and students.



8. STRATEGY FOR COMPLETION

The Technical assistance focused on the following aspects:

The revision of Quality Guidebook for Higher Education is based on the principles of ESG for internal QA in higher education institutions; The main sections include topics that are intended to fill the gaps revealed by the analysis of the current state of art of internal quality assurance systems at the universities belonging to the 8 consortia and ARACIS methodology. This analysis was based on the information collected through a questionnaire survey among 66 quality coordinators.

Description and analysis of the history and present development of the quality assurance approach and mechanisms in Romanian higher education and the role of various stakeholders in it and providing conclusions and recommendations for further enhancement in a Concept Paper; Adaptation and proposal of methods and tools for quality assurance with particular focus on programme approval, monitoring and review and student assessment procedures during the training sessions and in the revised Guidebook; 30 university representatives together with ARACIS and ACPART experts were trained in methods to: (a) build on existing institutional strategic plans to produce quality assurance strategies and action plans thus allowing for the monitoring and quality improvement processes to be streamlined; (b) develop and update study programmes using learning outcomes approach; (c) implement quality assurance policies and strategies and receive regular feedback reports; (d) organise professional development of the university teaching and administrative staff; (e) provide data support and data management for better quality; (f) institutionalise the quality assurance commission and the role of quality coordinator, including the external liaison with external quality assurance and qualification authorities like ARACIS, ACPART, professional accreditation agencies; Introduction of quality assurance mechanisms for the recognition of prior learning and updating the Quality Guidebook with these; Development of guidance notes and documentation for self-review reports during the training event for representatives of 8 university consortia and training of 24 quality coordinators from 8 university consortia in preparing for external monitoring and review of their quality assurance processes and procedures drafting initial statements of good practice in quality assurance based on a survey report with 66 quality coordinators, 16 interview reports with university managers and 10 good practice reports, and producing a new, revised edition of Quality Guidebook.



In addition, the process of collection and dissemination of good practice in quality enhancement was standardised through a Template, which was successfully implemented by quality coordinators and produced 10 different examples of good practice in quality assurance. These are included into the revised and updated Quality Guide.

In all the activities performed, particular emphasis was put on encouraging universities to compare their own practices with other Romanian and foreign universities, to identify fields of study with a good quality, for which to elaborate and disseminate reference standards and to develop a network of quality professionals across the higher education sector.

12. TIMETABLE FOR COMPLETION

The activities as outlined below were carried out between November 2007 and November 2008 during the life of the PHARE 2005 project. All activities have achieved their purposes as planned.

Activity Month Comment9.3 concept November inception report concept paper for task 9-

HE9.2 revision January Revision of Calisro Guidebook9.2. revision9.6. training

February Training needs analysis and meetings at PIU and ARACISRevision of CALISRO Guidebook

9.6 training9.4 monitoring

March Devising and discussing training strategy with ARACISDevising and discussing external monitoring strategy with ARACIS’ department for quality evaluation


April Development of briefing paper for monitoring visitsDevelopment of report templates for external monitoring expertsconference concept paper

9.6 training9.3. concept

May development of training materialsapproval of the training seminar rational and agenda by PIUTranslation and distribution of training materialsMeetings with ARACISConcept paper structure and discussion with local experts

9.2. revision9.3. concept

June Preparation of questionnaire for quality coordinators and discussion with local expertsPreparation of guided interview questions for



HE managers and discussion with local expertsPreparation of Template for standardisation of Good Practice Reports and discussion with local expertsSetting up a schedule for survey and interviewsSetting up a schedule for collection and reporting on good practices in QADiscussion on concept paper part I Background and context for QA in HE

9.2 revision9.3 concept9.4 monitoring

July Questionnaire survey in 62 faculties/departmentsInterviews with 16 HE managersInformation gathering and analysisConcept paper part 2- internal and external QAConcept paper part 3- summary of critical points and recommendationsSelection and negotiation with institutions and faculties for monitoring visits

9.2 revision9..3 concept

August Drafting an updated Quality GuideFinal concept paper

9.4 monitoring September Drafting detailed guidance notes to quality coordinators of scheduled for monitoring institutionsRevising external monitoring reports templatesSetting a model programme for monitoring visitsDetermining internal university documentation for submission to external monitoring experts

9.4 monitoring9.2. revision

October External monitoring visits to universities took placeDrafting external monitoring reportsThematic seminar contributionAmending updated Quality Guide upon comments provided by universities and ARACIS

9.2. revision9.4 monitoring

November 2nd draft Quality Guide translated into Romanian and distributed for implementationSummary report on monitoring exercise with recommendations preparedfinal task 9 report



10. MEANS OF ACHIEVEMENT

The project activities under Task 9 for higher education could achieve its objectives with the close cooperation with ARACIS and quality coordinators from the universities.

9.2. Together with ARACIS and quality coordinators it was agreed to develop an updated, new edition of the Quality Guide with particular focus on internal processes and mechanisms for quality assurance, based on European Standards and Guidelines for QA in HEIs and ARACIS criteria and standards for educational effectiveness and quality management. This agreement was further supported and refined with the help of the report on current state of quality assurance in higher education institutions (HEIs), using data from a survey conducted in 61 departments/faculties from different universities and the returned 66 questionnairs. In addition to this, 16 interview reports helped in clarifying the nature of the quality assurance issues and gaps identified through the questionnaire survey. A template was developed as a standardised tool to locate good practice in quality assurance, which to include in the new edition of the Guide.

9.3. The purpose and structure of the Concept Paper was extensively discussed and improved with the team of experienced and internationally recognised Romanian experts. It was finally agreed that after the discussion of the legal basis for quality assurance and the ARACIS activities, directions for further development and improvement should be proposed. It was agreed, also to emphasise particularly in the analysis the correspondence between internal institutional quality assurance and external evaluation. This is particularly important in the perspective of increased interdependence and partnership between quality assurance agencies and the national universities after the adoption of the ESG and the periodic evaluation of agencies.

9.4. In view of the present legal framework for quality evaluation of universities in Romania, it was only possible to maintain external monitoring visits upon informal agreement with universities and with a consent by their Rectors. The university documentation was not submitted officially to ARACIS, nor the agency could ask them to prepare new self-evaluation reports. After extensive discussions between the Quality Evaluation Department of ARACIS and the selected universities’ management, which took place from late June until late September, it was agreed that external monitoring experts will use the existing self-evaluation reports and the annual quality evaluation reports on education quality for their visits and final monitoring reports. Thus it was possible to carry out 7 external monitoring visits to universities only in October. The analysis of the implementation of external monitoring and self-assessment procedures and instruments throughout the university consortia was undertaken by local QA experts.



9.6. The 3-days training seminar for quality coordinators and representatives from universities belonging to the 8 university consortia took place in early June, following the opportunities presented by the typical academic calendar.

Task 10: Training for enhancing the institutional capacity of the Regional Consortia

Indicator of achievement

Eight training sessions (one per region) of minimum two days/session for 100 people representing Regional Consortia, in order to enhance the latter’s institutional capacity for co-ordinating activities and projects at regional and local level

The Terms of Reference stipulate for Task 10 training for enhancing the institutional capacity of the Regional Consortia to become key actors in providing information for all strategy planning related to HRD, including HE.Since the actual project had a special focus on the sustainability of results from the previous reform cycle of 2001-2003, and the first project under 2004-2006 second multiannual cycle, the specific results of PHARE 2005 were targeted at consolidating the impact of reforms and integrating the planning framework of both TVET and HE. Therefore, Task 10 comprise combined activities for both the TVET and HE sector. The expected outcomes of the completed tasks are moreover measured in terms of continuing the capacity building

Background and current position

Decisions about regional/local strategies for VET and HE provision became more and more the responsibility of the stakeholders from the Regional Consortia/ Local Development Committees. The development of collaborative working arrangements between the key actors in the region or at local level is essential and the multiannual Phare IB projects contributed a lot to the actual capacity which exist in all regions/counties of Romania. They, the Regional Consortia/ Local Development Committees were provided with the tools for development of regional /local strategies and more development is required to be done to support the Regional Consortia members to become key actors in providing information for all strategy planning related to HRD, including HE and in implementation and co-ordinating of activities and projects at regional and local level.The Lisbon Strategy, adopted by the European Council in 2000, placed new emphasis on knowledge, education and training setting a new strategic goal for the upcoming decade: to become “the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion”. The Lisbon strategy has two main goals. The first is to enhance economic competitiveness through improvements in human capital. The second is to promote social inclusion.

Following the Conclusions of the Heads of State and Governments in Lisbon and their endorsement of the common objectives for education and training in Europe in 2002 Barcelona Council, a radically new process of co-operation was launched



in this area, with the overall objective of making education and training systems in Europe a world quality reference by 2010.

Ministers of education agreed on three major goals to be achieved by 2010, namely: to improve the quality and effectiveness of EU education and training

systems; to ensure that they are accessible to all; to open up education and training to the wider world.

The re-launched Lisbon strategy focuses on competitiveness, growth and productivity and strengthening social cohesion. Even more than in its first phase, the revised Lisbon strategy places strong emphasis on knowledge, innovation and the optimisation of human capital. The onus put on European education and training systems is immense. Investing in research, education and innovation play central roles in generating added value and contributing to the creation of more and better jobs. Education and training are seen as critical factors to develop EU’s long-term potential for competitiveness as well as for social cohesion.Among the necessary reforms proposed under the Maastricht Communiqué on the Future Priorities of Enhanced European Cooperation in Vocational Education and Training ( December 2004) the “linking VET with the labour market requirements of the knowledge economy for a highly skilled workforce, and especially, due to the strong impact of demographic change, the upgrading and competence development of older workers” should be considered for the purpose of achieving social cohesion and increasing labour market participation.”Negotiations through the Education Committee led to adoption of the joint report in February 2006 which delivered a number of strong political messages to the European Spring Council of March 2006 in the context of its first review of the revised Lisbon strategy. These included: Education and training are critical factors if the EU’s long-term potential for excellence, innovation and competitiveness, as well as for social cohesion, is to be sustained. The dual role – social and economic – of education and training therefore needs to be reaffirmed, as well as the need to ensure the development of high quality systems which are both efficient and equitable. There can be no trade-off between these two dimensions. Education and training must be viewed as a priority for investment. The high returns it provides substantially outweigh the costs and reach far beyond 2010. Reforms in education and training are moving forward, but more substantial efforts are required. Investments, coupled with relevant quality assurance mechanisms, should be targeted on areas where economic returns and social outcomes are high.

The training for this task was completed by delivery of four training sessions in which were grouped two neighbour regions, during March (as it was detailed in appendix E from the Interim Report). The ToR called for 100 people to be trained, but approximately 150 people were actually trained. The rationale for increasing the number of participants was the need to include representatives of the LDC and the pilot schools.

Activities outstanding and means of achievement

No activities remain to be performed under this task. The task is complete, having used in full the initial allocation of 40 STE days

Task Description



The task for this project is to:

Eight training sessions (one per region) of minimum two days/session for 100 people representing Regional Consortia, in order to enhance the latter’s institutional capacity for co-ordinating activities and projects at regional and local level

At the national level the main stakeholders are: Those concerned HRD aspects in the Ministry of Education and Research and in the Ministry of Labour, Ministry of Development Public Works and Housing .

At the regional level the main stakeholders are: Members of the regional consortia and institutions which are represented by those members

Two main tasks are included in this component: T 10.1 Train the trainers and development of training materials

T.10.2 Training of 100 people representing Regional Consortia,;

Re: T10.1 Train the trainers a. Targeting the capacity building, the approach proposed considered the identification of eight local experts qualified as trainers under the previous TVET projects and promote their approval as trainers under the task 10. b. A training session for training the trainers took place in 3-4 March 2008 where through a consultation process with the trainers the training materials were developed for the regional sessions to come.

Re: T.10.2 Training of 100 people representing Regional Consortia,;d) Selection of 100 people representing Regional Consortia ,e) Organizing of four regional two days training sessions joining two regions per session kept simultaneously in pairs of two sessions in 11-12 of March and 14-15 of March 2008 . training materials, participants and evaluation report was delivered with the Interim Report.

During implementation, the TA focused on the following aspects regarding Task 2:

Training the trainers ; Prepare the training material . Delivery and evaluation of four training sessions.

The strategy for delivery the training for 100 people considered :f) Design of a training course for trainers. g) Selection of relevant training aspects for the regional consortia members and

develop the training materials for the course.h) Associate two trainers for each session delivered i) Associate two neighbours regions and locate the training in the most

accessible place for the participants.j) Articulate the training and deliver two training sessions of two days in the same

time and different location in order to enhance the institutional capacity for co-ordinating activities and projects at regional and local level



The task for this project was to hold:

Four regional training session for 100 participants targeting in order to enhance the institutional capacity in co-ordinating activities and projects at regional and local level. 150 people were trained.


o 4 regional training sessions of 2 days eacho 100 people representing Regional Consortia trained for enhancing the

institutional capacity in co-ordinating activities and projects at regional and local level

The task was delivered according with the plan in the first interim period of the project

Impact of completed task and recommendations

Regional stakeholders now have the capacity enhanced to contribute at the coordination of HRD activities and projects in the region ; There are few recommendations sk other than using the already built capacity of regional consortia by maintaining the membership and representation from various

Task 11: Training for the schools and Universities’ staff in participative management

Planned outputs

20 sessions in participative management and student centered teaching processes, having duration of 2 days/session for 420 persons representing the 150 TVET schools and the 8 university consortia

Four study visits of 7 days duration each, for a total of 76 participants, in EU member states and/or IPA/NP countries

Participative ManagementIn order to provide both TVET schools and the 8 universities with training focused on their individual needs, separate training programs were designed for each set of institutions and agreed with the PIU. Whilst aimed at different clientele - TVET and HE respectively - the issues highlighted in the training have a common core of concerns:

The features of types of management style;

The advantages and disadvantages of different management styles;

The benefits of introducing participative management in VET schools and HE institutions;

The situations where participative management would provide the best



results in TVET schools and HEIs;

The management issues related to competence-based education;

The management issues related to student-centred learning;

The management issues related to competence-based assessment;

In order to reduce demands on schools to release staff over a period of time the number of sessions for was reduced to 4 sessions for an average of 100 persons from TVET schools. Additional sessions were provided for the universities. The maintenance of quality was assured through the provision of three facilitators for each session in addition to the trainer.

Planned Output 1: Three training sessions of 2 days/session for 100 participants from TVET schools (additional sessions reported elsewhere were provided for the universities.

Four sessions of 2 days duration each were provided:Session 1: 15th to 17th June 2008 - Hotel Sinaia, SinaiaSession 2: 18th to 20th June 2008 - CluijSession 3: 23rd to 25th June 2008 - Hotel Sinaia, SinaiaSession 4: 13th to 15th June 2008 - Piatra-NeamtThe aim of the training program was to develop participant competence in participative management and student centred learning. A total of 309 participants attended the sessions:Session 1: 90Session 2: 68Session 3: 71Session 4: 80

The 20 training sessions for 420 VET and HE beneficiaries (according to ToR) were compressed to:

4 training sessions for VET beneficiaries (school managers) for approx. 340 persons

2 training sessions for HE beneficiaries, for approx. 80 persons

Sustainability was enhanced by the development of a 85 page participant guidebook that could be used within schools by teachers and trainers.Documents Produced“Participative Management”; 122 page participant guidebook for use during the training sessions and for future reference.AccreditationThe training courses were accredited by the NCPTE, the Romanian National body for teacher training accreditation. Participation in the training events will therefore form part of attendees accredited continuing professional development.Quality AssuranceFor these and for the HE sessions, participants were asked to complete an evaluation questionnaire at the end of each training event. The evaluation questionnaire included two sections each designed to collect data on different aspects of the training session.Section 1 included 9 questions focused on gathering data related to the effectiveness of the training session in achieving the stated objectives. Responses indicate that on average over 99% of participants agreed that the



stated objectives of the training sessions were achieved. Section 2 included 11 questions focused on gathering data related to the quality of the learning and teaching experience provide during the training session. Responses indicate that on average over 99% of participants were highly satisfied with the quality of the learning and teaching experience provided during the training sessions.With regard to the HE sessions Two seminars in October 2008 addressed the issues in shifting HE processes. With the agreement of PIU, national student organisation leaders were among the participants.

Materials (HE only): - presentations to seminar 16 & 17 October (presentation by key HE expert, case

study by Alexandru Ioan cuza University Iasi, presentation by ANOSR)

- presentations to seminar 30 & 31 October (case study by University Politehnica Timisoara, additional to above material)

Details of participants the data collected are provided in Annex 11.

Planned Output 2: Four study visits of 7 days duration each, for a total of 76 participants, in EU member states and/or IPA/NP countries

As required by the ToR, study visits to EU member states were arranged for up to 76 participants, 24 of whom will be from the HE sector. The purpose of the visits were to exchange experiences of good practice and to provide opportunities for peer learning. Following discussions with the PIU, it was agreed that there should be between 12 and 20 participants on each visit.

Introduction

Overall the visits were successful in meeting their objectives. The paragraphs below are a summary of a full report of these activities contained in Annex 11.

Activities and strategies for completion

The countries proposed for the final selection of four destinations were: Finland (two TVET visits) UK (one TVET visit and one higher education visit split on two groups)

Purpose and scope of the visitsThe overall purposes of the visits reflected those of the project stated above, and in summary these are: To consolidate the governance and accountability mechanisms in the provision of initial TVET and HE degrees To enhance the ability of the system to provide professional qualifications corresponding to European standards, related to the abilities and aspirations of each individual and to the requirements of economic development To strengthen the institutional capacity of schools, especially in rural areas, to educate and train graduates capable of contributing to the regeneration of their local economy

Following a consultation process with colleagues from the PIU and other stakeholders, the decision was taken that for the study visits organized for the



representatives of the TVET sector, we should try to take advantage of the opportunities offered by each of the visited countries, in order to discuss and analyse the following issues: Policy development Qualifications definition and development Employer involvement School and college visits to see the flexible development of opportunities of learning pathways and associated devolved methods of quality assurance

Similarly, in consultation with HE colleagues and organisations such as ARACIS and ACPART, for the study visits organised for the Higher Education (HE) representatives, were taken into account the following policy development aspects: Qualifications definition and development Social partner involvement Visits to see the flexible development of qualifications and quality assurance suited to regional and national leads

As a result of all consultation process (stakeholders and PIU), we found that these purposes mean a practical focus on: The means of identifying new qualifications required in the labour market by using (labour market analysis, forecasts and other planning instruments) and developing mechanisms for providing those qualifications in the TVET and HE sectors The means of providing flexible methods of quality assurance The involvement of stakeholders and partners from the social and economic sectors in TVET and HE planning and provision The process of developing training standards and curricula for new qualifications and the adaptation of school offer to the labour market needs (regional, local, national) Implementing Learner-centred strategies, including that related to special educational needs, and flexible and distance learning Strategies of lifelong learning and professional development The role of the school or institution in the community, including in rural areas Quality assurance instruments for the TVET and HE sectors; Participative management in the provision of training programmes. Specific industries involvement in school provision and their contribution in curriculum development, workplace training for students and contribution to the transition from school to workplace.

A paper forwarded to the PIU on 27 May – and subsequently developed - detailed the rationale for the visits and strategies for completion; subsequent discussion The outline arrangements provisionally made with hosts of the study tours were progressively developed; following approval by the PIU, final arrangements were made with the host authority or company in the countries concerned.For the TVET study visits, the purposes and practical foci identified led to the identification of the following main participant categories: Key members of Regional Education Action Plan (REAP) structures Co-ordinators of distance and flexible learning programmes at regional level Key ministry personnel responsible for policy and practice integration between national and regional levels

For the HE proposals in participants for , extensive consultations with colleagues from ARACIS, ACPART and major stakeholders have isolated those in positions of responsibility at institutional, faculty and organisational level who would benefit



from the identified practical foci above. Following this identification of needs and of related personnel, we identified the countries which could provide a record of experience related to the needs (practical foci).

Participants Destination country

Period

15 persons, National policy/decision makers and stakeholders in TVET and HE

Finland 24-30.08.2008

19 Persons representatives of national educational stakeholders and of regional consortia

Finland 14-21.09.2008

17 persons, representatives of distance education centers

UK 7-13.09.2008

Group A 12 participants from HE system involved in development of Qualification Framework in HE

UK 05 -11.10. 2008

Group A 11 participants from HE system involved in development of HE Quality Assurance system .

As it might be seen from the table above, the study visits outcomes in terms of numbers (planned to be 76 participants), remained at the end of the project to an effectively number of 74 participants; this happed due to the last minute announcement of unavailability of two participants under the last UK study visit 05-11 October 2008.

Should be mentioned similar situation it happen in the first Finland study visit (24-30.08.2008), where in the context of an emergency family reason, one participant made a last minute announcement that could not attend (did not joint to the group for the visit).

This “place” was reallocated for the last UK study visit where again the re-planned position and another one did not attend the visit for emergencies in the working place and subject of last minute announcement which did not allow replacements to be done.

In term of logistics, planning and booking arrangements were carried out in time and one expert from the project technical assistance accompanied each group during their visits to the four EU countries, besides the interpretation person dedicated to each of the group. The accompanying expert from WYG International Ltd. during the entire programme of each visit took the responsibility for guiding the participants to meet the destinations, local travel arrangements and all other requirements which could appear during the visit.

Feedback from the visits was provided in the following ways: general written evaluation by the participants at the end of each group’s visit study visit report after finalization of the study visit programme to be presented at the final stage of the project (the actual report)

At the end of each visit the participants were asked to assess the visit and in this respect they filled in an evaluation form. In this form they were asked to give feedback on whether the visit:



To what extend the organization visited has importance in meeting the needs of participants/objective of the visits To what extend the organization visited presented itself To what extend the organization visited had quality of information To what extend the participants had good dialogue with organizations visited To what extend the participants considered that they had results after the meetings

Impact and recommendations

Overall, the evaluations of the participants were overwhelmingly positive, but there is always room to improve such visits.

The groups met with various level representatives of the institutions as they were presented in the full report contained in Annex 11. The officials and representatives, whom the group met, made in general good quality presentations, were open and available for discussion with the group and express their openness to provide further information if necessary – business cards and contact data were made available for the participants during the presentations . The visits had a varied range of speakers and attempted to cover essentials especially so that a clear background was given. The programmes aimed to strike a balance between longstanding agencies and approaches and newer organisations with more innovative approaches. Perhaps the complexity of the visited countries systems mitigates against a clear understanding on a first visit of the aims of some of the newer organisations. However , the view was taken that , the effect and the implementation some of these policies would be seen.The rhythm of the study visits weeks was in general well organised so that the participants to be able to accumulate information as many as possible. The groups were encouraged to use the breaks and afternoons to discuss together what they had seen in order to draw together the issues they needed to explore further in the final visits. Based on the feed back received during the visits and from the assessment of the participants, we felt that we were able to cover in the time allotted, albeit it briefly, the topics requested and hope that the participants were able to take out of the visits the information and insights that will be useful for them in their own workBut, inevitably there was some unevenness in the quality of presenter. Not all seemed well briefed on the purpose of the visits and some gave what was clearly a standard presentation. However, it is difficult to see how a better approach in future could be formulated.Sometimes presenters assumed a level of knowledge and understanding of their specific country education system which the visitors did not have. Aspects were clarified during discussion so that at the end all participants were clearer about aspects in discussion. Some of the days were quite long, especially those involving travel outside the main locality the group was settled. This may have contributed to a growing lack of focus and concentration later in the afternoon.As a general comment the approaches to helping less traditional learners and those with disadvantages were especially welcomed. The “open” ways for the easy access to the life long learning approaches were appreciated as well. Delegates were impressed by the flexibility which exists within FE/HE in the visited systems as they are not yet similar in Romania..The composition of the groups were made so as to bring together national decision-making bodies, regional stakeholders in TVET / HE and social partners. By this, sustainability and implementation of ideas could be directly discussed and agreed among the participants.



In general, the contents of the programmes and the opportunities to meet centrally-placed representatives of the VET and HE Systems in the two European Union countries offered to the 74 persons was regarded as excellent, very relevant and of high quality.

The logistics, local travels, accommodation and additional activities – though in general satisfactory - did leave some comments and suggestions for improvement.The following suggestions for improvements were also made: more concrete demonstrations and less theoretical presentations more examples of practical more homogeneous groups of participants so that

they fit together in interest with the programme of the visit activities

Task 12: Awareness activities and dissemination of project resultsIndicators of achievement

Strategy for information and communication;

TVET website to be constantly updated during the project;

Two conferences of two days duration per conference, for around 200 people each;

Three thematic seminars of one day each for 50 participants each;

Four thematic newsletters to be issued in English and Romanian.

Dissemination strategy

The requirement to promote awareness of the project among stakeholders and the general public has been pursued by various means. The first major Conference was organised successfully in Siniaia on 5-6 May, involving invited international speakers and with the active participation of most of the TA team. During this event, the first of four thematic newsletters was distributed in Romanian and English versions. The second major Conference was held successfully in Sinaia on from 13-14 October; during this event the second thematic newsletter was distributed. Following the Conference, a further two Newsletters were produced in October and November respectively. Documentation may be found in Annex 12.The first two of three thematic seminars (with approximately 50 participants each) required by the ToR were held in June; the third, with an HE focus was held in October. Documentation may be found in Annex 12.The progress of disseminating the achievements of the Project required a new appointment of the local STE, the original appointee having resigned with effect from 1 May 2008. This cause some delays in the implementation of the strategy, but all ToR obligations were fulfilled by the project end.The appointment during May of a local STE for website development enabled commencement of updating the project website in order to support dissemination of information about the project and to aid access to documents produced by the project. By the end of the reporting period, the website had been revised and learning and dissemination material from the Project had begun to be incorporated.Development of the site included Romanian and English language pages together with Romanian and English text only versions of all pages. Quality assurance of the website content was ensured by a content approval process, with the TL co-ordinating the PIU’s approval of content through liaising with the STE appointed as website manager.




