ETF SUPPORT TO KOSOVO ETF SUPPORT TO KOSOVO GOVERNMENT EDUCATION SECTOR GOVERNMENT EDUCATION SECTOR STRATEGIC PLAN 2011-2016 STRATEGIC PLAN 2011-2016

17 MAY 2011,TURIN17 MAY 2011,TURIN

The “good news story” of Kosovo

• EU accession as nationally shared policy anchor; • Overall reform of the education system since 2000,

inspired by EU and international practice;• Youngest population in Europe: population growth, ethnic

diversity;• Human capital development a priority sector;• Substantial EU and other donor support in HCD helps

increase social cohesion and the employability of youth.

ETF 2011-2013 Work Programme in Kosovo

Focus on:• vocational education and training at all levels in the context

of life-long learning;• governance and content of vocational education and

training;• access and inclusion;• increased attention to the benefits of social partnership to

link the world of education and the world of work.

ETF 2011-2013 Work Programme in Kosovo

Processes:• Upon request, support to the European Commission in the

design and implementation of external assistance to Kosovo (IPA programming and monitoring, SAP discussions, EC Progress Report, country background analysis, regional cooperation etc.);

• 2010 Torino Process review of Kosovo VET policies and systems analysis on cooperation between education and business. TPR to be repeated in 2012;

• Policy advice and capacity enhancement to Kosovo stakeholders in conducting self- assessment of VET reforms and policy development, implementation, progress, review, monitoring and impact assessment.

ETF 2011-2013 Work Programme in Kosovo

How:

• dissemination of information;

• networking and exchange of experience and good practice at country, region and cross-region;

• supporting participation in EU conferences, workshops;

• developing joint research or analytical work, and

• organising peer review exercises.

Torino process aims

The ETF launched and coordinated ‘Torino Process’ aiming: • to get an overview of VET reforms in Kosovo;• to identify key trends and gaps;• to assess the extent to which EU policy developments in

education and training are a point of reference and inspiration for reforms in Kosovo.

Key Findings:• Issues• Ways forward• Good practices in VET system in Kosovo• Benchmark with ETF partner countries.

Added value for Kosovo

• Focus on evidence;• Better understanding of policy formulation and impact;• Better design of policy options;• Support capacity development with the view to promote

self-assessment;• Increased relevance of the ETF and EU assistance;• Better knowledge and understanding of the EU policy

objectives;• More efficient and effective use of EU messages and tools;• Increased visibility at the international level.

Four building blocks of the analytical framework

1. Main economic challanges;2. How the system is addressing them;3. Main social challanges;4. How the system is addressing them.

External efficiency

1. Major area of innovation and partnership in the system;2. Policies conducive to innovation and partnership;3. Measures to support innovation and partnership;4. Obstacles for upscaling and mainstreaming innovation;5. Obstacles for enhanced.

Innovation, partnership and

entrepreneurship

1. Engineering: Curriculum and teaching, physical resources, Finance and administration;

2. Incentives: Performance standards, Motivation/Reward;3. Public accountability: Performance Evaluation &

Monitoring, Voices at the national and local levels.

Internal efficiency, quality, governance

and financing

1. VET scope;2. Policies, programmes and priorities;3. Tools to support policies: LM outcomes, using evidence

for policy making, involving stakeholders.

Vision and mission of VET

3 Relevance of VET: Mismatch with LM needs, absence of mechanisms for transition from school to work, weak Education-Business partnership;

Competitiveness: the lack of international competitiveness is a key barrier to economic growth;

Summary of challenges for VET external

efficiency: economic

Evidence-based policies: low capacity for economy and Labour market intelligence;

Investing in people: incentive system for enterprises to invest in upgrading the skills of their employees;

Common ground of E&T reforms: (i) decentralisation; (ii) NQF; (iii) the design and gradual implementation of professionalization and licensing mechanism for teachers; (iv) the design and set-up of new institutional arrangements.

Reforms movements: substantial reform movements of the education and training system;

Vision and state of the art in VET sector

Emergence of new system: Several systemic and permanent institutional arrangements are already in place including substantial legislative activity;

Vision and state of the art in VET sector: 2011-2016 Strategy

• Objective: develop ‘sustainable links between VET and global social and economic developments’.

• Key targets: 1. Students’ professional practice in VET is to be carried out in close

cooperation with enterprises; 2. By 2016 vocational schools must have financial and operational autonomy; 3. Centres of Competence must become an integral part of the national VET

system; 4. Professional profiles offered by VET institutions must become relevant for

the labour market; 5. There must be a comprehensive and functioning evaluation system in VET; 6. VET curricula must be in line with the needs of the labour market and meet

international standards; 7. There must be an increased mobility and employability of the graduates

from VET both in the local and foreign market; 8. A functional national qualifications system and procedures for equivalence

and accreditation must be in place.

Demography: relatively young population structure( maybe new trends after the results of Census 2011);

Human capital: low educational levels of the population in general;

Summary of challenges for VET external efficiency: social

Unemployment: very high long-term-unemployment rates and high inactivity rates especially of women;

Equity: deep inequalities in particular between urban and rural areas and poverty in particular of ethnic (non-Serb) minorities;

3 Drivers for reforms: there is a need to embed NQF and COCs in the wider reform vision and that their promise and potential are fully scaled up throughout the system;

Attractiveness: there is a need to improve the quality and enhance the relevance of VET system to labour market and individual needs;

Internal efficiency: Summary of challenges

Articulation of sub-systems: there is a need to build consistency across the set of education reforms including higher education;

Governance: need to find the ‘right’ incentives for enterprises and their representatives to get involved in the management of VET, to link decentralisation with quality and build consistent

institutional arrangements for governance of the system.

The potential added value of NQF?

• The starting position, context and ‘institutional logics’ are critical;

• NQF cannot substitute weak institutions;• The processes which add value are social and political more

than technical;• NQFs take time to add value : many years of continuous

commitment. Government and donors should not expect reforms to be completed on a project cycle of 2-3 years;

• More (ambition) is less (achievement): In Kosovo case, it is important to select interim outputs and outcomes consistent with a long-term commitment to such reforms;

• NQFs are not sufficient – need ‘policy breadth’.

Policy options

1. Sectoral (economic) approach: where the focus is not just on developing new qualifications, but ensuring coordinated skills, labour market and socioeconomic policies in particular sectors;

2. Accreditation: as a driver for changing institutional cultures by putting and keeping the issue of quality on the agenda of the management and staff;

3. Scope of NQF: priority to VET but need for more policy coordination with other sub-systems particularly HE;

4. Collective learning: Community of practices and the opportunity of the centres of competences might be good way to progress.

Policy Options to Strengthen Kosovo’s VET Governance and to Raise Quality: COCs

•Raising Status/Prestige of Vocational Education and Training;•Autonomy of centres (Quality Management System, qualifications, infrastructure);•Relation with four bodies: KPI (Quality), KNQA (Qualification), and CVET (steering), Municipalities (funding);•Collaboration with industries.

But there is room for improving the design of COCs

1. Multi-services institutions

- The Demand from Employers (Business and Industry);

- The Demand from Society;

- The Demand from individual.

2. Pathways with post-secondary VET

3. Ensuring that the critical reform features are introduced in their design

Invest in capacity building and strengthen the mechanisms to hold central government institutions accountable for their performance;

Continue to explore decentralization options by tightly linking it with quality and school autonomy;

Summary of Priority Areas in governance

Introduce institutional changes to strengthen separation of policy-setting and oversight functions across institutions;

Introduce incentives for enterprises and strengthen their capacities in HR for example through sectoral skills councils.

Inputs and Rules-based

Outcomes-based

Central

More localized

Traditional system

Central goal-setting

Centralistand Input and rules-based

Future evolution?

Localized and professionalized implementation

Localized accountability

Institutional arrangement in Kosovo

MEST Ministry of Labour

NQA

Municipal authorities

SchoolsVTCs

CVET

Pedag.Instit.

SCTL

Inspectorate

NCCT

Schools boards

PO

LIC

YO

VE

RS

IGH

T

DE

LIV

ER

Y

Questions for discussion today

• How to link decentralisation with quality?• What elements of the COCs model need

to be added?• What are the interim targets/milestones

of NQF? What other policy measures are required?

• What could be the incentives for companies to invest in skills

Typology of NQFs

Communications Reforming Transformational

Starting point

Existing education and training (ET) system

Existing ET system Future ET system

Purpose Increase transparency, tool for rationalisation, coherence,

access, transfer and progression

Same as communications plus specific reforms: fill

gaps, enhance quality, etc

Define parameters, and lead development, of

new system

Design Loose, varies across sub-frameworks, outcomes-

referenced

Tighter, varies across sub-frameworks, outcomes-

referenced

Tight, more uniform, outcomes-led

Expected role in change

Tool for change: needs complementary drivers

Drives specific changes, needs complementary

drivers for other impacts

Expected to drive transformation of system

Source: David Raffe modified by Borhene Chakroun

Typology of NQF

Source: Mike Coles modified by Borhene Chakroun

Type of framework

Characteristics Governance

Implicit No explicit expression of a framework (diagram, levels, descriptors). However qualifications levels are known by citizens (e.g. what qualification is needed for university, to enter the labour market as a skilled worker)Obviously no links between different education or training sectors

Governance fragmented across departments, uneven participation of SP

Sector Defined series of qualification levels for one or more education and training sectors (general, VET, HE, Adult), some sector frameworks will have level descriptors. No explicit links between the sector frameworks for different education or training sectors.

Governance fragmented across sectors, uneven participation of SP

Bridging In its weakest form there is a set of common levels covering all education sectors which is the basis for relating to each education and training sector framework. In its strongest form these common levels can have a set of descriptors that are different to those of the sector frameworks they relate to. Separate sector frameworks exist as a basis to this bridging framework.The Bridging framework forms an formal link between different education or training sectors

Governance fragmented across sectors, SP expected to be key partners

Overarching A single set of levels and descriptors covering all education and training sectors, each sector uses this set of levels and descriptors as its own framework. No separate sector frameworks exist. The integrating framework forms a formal link between different education or training sectors.

Central Governance, SP expected to drive and to be key partners

Communication Transformative

Implicit

Overarching

KOSOVO

The aspiration of KOSOVO NQF: policy objectives and how to achieve them

Peda-gogy

Trans-parency of quals

Unit-isation

Institutional arrangements

Regulation Stake-holders

System Transparency

Continuation, Coherence & sustainability of reforms

Access, transfer & progression

Accountability & control

Increase Quality

Relevance to demand

Improve employability

lifelong learning

Discussing the COCs design

1. Sector-based approach

2. Multi-services institutions

- The Demand from Employers (Business and Industry);

- The Demand from Society;

- The Demand from Individual.

3. Pathways with post-secondary VET

4. Ensuring that the critical reform features are introduced in their design

Elements of action on governance: Further Decentralisation

Better, keep as central functions that:• Have economies of scale • Require extremely rare talent• Establish equity• Are required to correct spillovers between areas

Better, decentralize functions that:• Require speedy execution• Require assessing subtle information• Require client feedback and establishing client esteem

and sanction• Are amenable to professional judgment

Elements of action on governance: Further Decentralisation

What the government is trying to fix?• Started with financial decentralisation;• Decentralisation does not necessarily mean more money.

How to link decentralisation with quality?• More output-based formula;• Localized quality implementation: Quality Assurance Units (“error-

detect”, certify relatively “error-free”) : accredit to goal; Technical Support Units: prepare, “error-fix” so can meet accreditation

• Not just accountability to the central services but also to local stakeholders (localised school improvement plans with BoT approval etc.).

Key problems of funding

1. No specific budget for VET, hence no capacity to monitor and evaluate the efficiency of the system;

2. Budgets are negotiated, hence based on history, bargaining power, or randomness;

not predictable or transparent; results in vast differences;3. Input-based formula;4. When VET schools have revenue, most of these do not stay

at school level, but flow to the centre. Used in ways that are not transparent to schools;

5. Donors supported schools are in better conditions.

Concluding comments

Government has made very courageous steps BUT work is becoming harder in two ways:

Technically• Financial: More items will need to be integrated, funding formulas and

budgeting need to mesh, better databases are needed, procedures need to be documented etc.

• Pedagogical decentralisation (mix of central goals and local application) is technically more difficult;

• Financial and pedagogical need to be integrated;• Need clearer capacity in MEST to design and implement

decentralisation.

PoliticallyAccountability and Equity will become an issue as decentralisation

becomes more “real” – political will is required.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ON ETF IN KOSOVO

You can contact usUlrike.Damyanovic@etf.europa.eu

Lida.Kita@etf.europa.eu Michael.Graham@etf.europa.eu Gabriela Platon@etf.europa.eu Soren Nielsen@etf.europa.eu Cristiana.Burzio@etf.europa.eu

http://www.etf.europa.eu

or through your Ministry’s portalhttp://www.masht-gov.net/advCms/#id=96

Faleminderit

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ON ETF

Visit our website:

www.etf.europa.eu

Email us:

info@etf.europa.eu