FLLLEX

FLLLEX: The Impact of LifeLong Learning Strategies onProfession-oriented Higher Education in Europe

Project results

Margriet de Jong

Klaas Vansteenhuyse

FLLLEX

• FLLLEX− Project goals summary− Update on activities

• Survey results:− lifelong learners (wp 2)− Employers (wp3)− Lifelong learning providers (wp 4)

• Self-assessment tool (wp 6+7)− Review experiences and findings

• Dissemination: publication on FLLLEX results (See Margriet).

Contents

FLLLEX

FLLLEX goals

FLLLEX intended to:

Provide a report on national LifeLong Learning policies

Provide a self-assessment tool on LifeLong Learning for HEI’s

Exchange good practices on LifeLong Learning in professional higher education

Provide policy advice to the European Commission on the structure of LifeLong Learning post 2013 and to involve the LLL policy makers in the project partner countries

FLLLEX

FLLLEX partners

National Agencies• Belgium (Flanders)• Finland• France• Ireland• Lithuania• The Netherlands• United Kingdom (Scotland)• Turkey

Institutions• KHLeuven – Leuven University College• Laurea UAS• IuT de Saint-Nazaire• Letterkenny IoT• Vilnius College• Hanzehogeschool• Clydebank College• Yasar University

Structural partners• Eurashe• 3s• Banku Augstskola• Educonsult

Advisory Board• Business Europe• Education International• European Student’s Union

Budget: 586.447 Euro

FLLLEX

FLLLEX work packages

• WP 1, National and European policies for the implementation of LLL (review)IOT (Ireland), Richard Thorn and Ann Stokes

• WP 2, Survey of expectations of LifeLong Learners• WP 3, Survey of expectations of businesses

3S research lab (Austria), Stefan Humpl and Sigrid Nindl

• WP 4, Survey of the (business) training providersEURASHE, Iva Voldanova and Stefan Delplace

FLLLEX

FLLLEX work packages

• WP 5, Development of a self-assessment tool

ENQA (Spain), Josep Griffoll

• WP 6, Self-assessment of the Higher Education InstitutionsKHLeuven (Belgium), Irène Hermans

• WP 7, Review of the self-assesmentWoSCop (Scotland), Dugald Craig

• WP 8, Focus seminar on LLL strategies (dissemination: EURASHE conference)

• WP 9, Project management

FLLLEX

WP Activity Period

2 + 3 Surveys of LLL students and employers 04/2010 – 04/2011

4 Survey on LLL providers 03/2010 – 10/2010

6 Self evaluation in the HEI’s 12/2010 – 05/2011

7 Review meetings 06/2011 – 12/2011

9 Preparing pre-conference publication 12/2011 – 5/2012

10 Project management (administration, finance, other dissemination initiatives)

ongoing

Update on activities

FLLLEX

• FLLLEX− Project goals summary− Update on activities

• Survey results:− lifelong learners (wp 2)− Employers (wp3)− Lifelong learning providers (wp 4)

• Self-assessment tool (wp 6+7)− Review experiences and findings

• Dissemination: publication on FLLLEX results (See Margriet).

Contents

FLLLEX

WP 2: Lifelong learners

Main findings

–Typology

3s research laboratory, www.3s.co.at

Focus Main Type Sub-types Description Relation Contents / Tasks

Start of programme before / after joining career

Education

CompletingFinishing

Working while studying without particular connection of work and education

Insignificant Before

Entering Being hired in late phases by an employer in need of graduates

Strong, clearly visible relation Before

Returning Returning Returning to education and overruling a temporary transition to work Insignificant After

Transforming Transforming General transformation using education as a basis No relation After

WorkReinforcing

ProgressingProgressing in the current field by at least one step on the educational ladder

Strong, clearly visible relation

After (exceptional: before)

AdaptingMaking one step in the current field, in parallel to an existing one not relevant in the field

Strong, clearly visible relatioin After

Specialising Completing one programme as a specialisation

Strong, clearly visible relation After

PeakingCompleting a formal programme designed for experienced professionals in the field

Strong, clearly visible relation After

Compensating Compensating Compensating the restriction of an existing pathway Insignificant After

FLLLEX

WP 2: Lifelong learners

Main problems:

–Low response rate for some countries(skewed results, not possible to compare countries)

  Freq %Finland 555 36%Ireland 279 18%Turkey 185 12%Lithuania 171 11%Belgium 149 10%Scotland 69 5%Netherlands 55 4%France 30 2%Other Country 32 2%

Total 1.525 100%

– Survey addresses only students who already participate in higher education; hence reasons for non-participation were not investigated

– Descriptive report, no concluding statements

FLLLEX

• FLLLEX− Project summary− Update on activities

• Survey results:− Lifelong Learners (wp 2)− Employers (wp3)− Lifelong learning providers (wp 4)

• Self-assessment tool (wp 6+7)− Review experiences and findings

• Dissemination: publication on FLLLEX results (See Margriet).

Contents

FLLLEX

WP 3: Survey employers

Main problems:

– Only 3 partners attained target response of 20 ‘businesses’

  Freq %Ireland 24 24%Netherlands 23 23%Turkey 20 20%Lithunia 16 16%Belgium 7 7%Scotland 5 5%Finland 2 2%France 1 1%Other Country 1 1%

Total 99 100%

– Descriptive report, no concluding statements

FLLLEX

WP 4: Survey of LLL-providers

Main findings:

−The landscape of lifelong learning providers is complex and very country-specific.

−HEI’s are generally not aware of their competitors or partners in the field

−LLL-providers can be categorized in 5 main types: HEI Adult centre Private training provider Public provider specific group focused Sectoral organisation

FLLLEX

WP 4: Survey of LLL-providers

Main problems:

−Low response rates for interviews:

−Very complex matter to analyse

−Time period for preparation and data collection too short(no literature research done before setup)

  FreqIreland 5Turkey 5Belgium 4Finland 2Netherlands 1Scotland -France -Lithuania -Total 17

FLLLEX

WP 7: External review

Goal:‗Reviewing the applicability of the FLLLEX self-assessment tool‗Review and discuss the results of the self-assessment exercises

Method:

Review visit to 7 institutions by review panel: External expert Peer reviewer from another partner institution Policy representative from a relevant regional or national

body in the host country.

FLLLEX

WP 7 External Experts

• Michal Karpíšek (CZ), Vice–President of EURASHE; Executive Officer at Czech Association of Schools of Higher Education

• Dr Rob Mark (UK), Director of Lifelong Learning, University of Strathclyde, Scotland

• Prof. John Storan (UK), Director of Continuum, the Centre for Widening Participation Policy Studies at the University of East London

WP7 lead: Dugald Craig (UK), International Development Manager with West of Scotland Colleges’ Partnership

FLLLEX

Review findings wp 7: strategy components of LLL

• HEI’s are incorporating LLL in their strategy by: Supporting the recognition, accreditation and certification of

prior learning

adapting their learning programmes to learning outcomes and credit-based approaches that support part-time, open, project and work-based learning.

Partnership working and collaboration is a natural feature of the operational reality for the majority of the institutions and the remainder are positive about opening their institutions up to this

FLLLEX partners are well aware of the regional ,national and European policy drivers and imperatives and extremely receptive to European cooperation and networking

FLLLEX

Applicability of the FLLLEX Self-Assessment Tool

• Method similar and compatible to EFQM-like approaches: fosters appreciation and confidence.

• Tool stimulates discussion and leads to accurate indication of the organisation’s current situation with regard to the incorporation of LLL

• Use of focus groups was, generally, perceived as a positive feature.

• Tool is relatively easy to follow

FLLLEX

Suggestions for improvement:

• Instrument needs to be shortened and simplified• Extend functionality from a stocktaking tool to a more

organic planning instrument that uses an evaluation of past and current practice to chart a course for the future.

• Develop briefer and clearer instructions for use serious consideration should be given to developing an

accompanying training course and pack for new and ongoing users.

• Provide guidance on fitting into existing tools and systems for QA and on added value.

FLLLEX

FLLLEX results

• Achieved the intended outcomes

but

• Reports are descriptive

• Results are often skewed by low responses

• Survey addresses only students who already participate in higher education

FLLLEX

FLLLEX results: institution

• List of “Policy hooks” and “Institutional control or Freedom of action”

• Typology of Lifelong Learners

• Key elements for participation of Lifelong Learners

• Contact with employers (information deficit)

• Contact with LLL providers

= institution versus programme?

= what about institutional strategy?

FLLLEX

FLLLEX results: policy

1. Support the development of coherent and balanced national lifelong strategies to develop flexible and effective education and training systems:

•Validation of prior learning; •European qualification frameworks for Lifelong Learning; •Development of teaching and assessment methods in line with the competence approach in all sectors and levels; •Capacity-building and ownership of policies by stakeholders including higher education institutions.

FLLLEX

FLLLEX results: policy

2. Need for investment in Lifelong Learning

3. Use of policy hooks

4. Support development of partnerships

5. Adapt definition of LLL to clarify communication

FLLLEX

Project coordination

Klaas VansteenhuyseMargriet de Jong

Leuven University College (KHLeuven)Abdij van Park 9B-3001 Heverlee

klaas.vansteenhuyse@khleuven.bemargriet.dejong@khleuven.beinternational@khleuven.be

+32 16 375 735