3.4. Establishing flexible learning pathways

Since LLL includes a wide variety of learning opportunities, policy options may represent more than one modality, i.e. any combination of formal, non-formal or informal learning modalities. Interventions aimed at promoting flexibility, such as flexible learning pathways, enable learners to transition within and across formal and non-formal education, training and employment.

The model represented in Figure 3.1 identifies and classifies different characteristics of LLL that may affect implementation. By showcasing a spectrum of learning across age groups, levels of education, modalities, spheres, spaces and purposes, the model is a visual representation of the five essential elements of UNESCO’s understanding of LLL, as introduced at the beginning of Chapter 1.

Figure 3.1. Overview of lifelong learning opportunities

Source: UNESCO, 2016a

The model identifies commonalities across levels, potential interventions and engagement by stakeholders, as well as other factors significant to the implementation process.

To ensure that the needs of all learners are met, the Education 2030 Agenda promotes flexible, student-centred education provision that encourages the pursuit of diverse learning pathways. SDG 4 urges countries to ‘ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all’ (UN, 2015). This vision recognizes the importance of providing flexible learning opportunities for people of all ages. Learning pathways denote the ways in which we navigate and sequence our learning, skills development, education and training to attain competency towards a qualification or part-qualification within an occupational or academic context (Lotz-Sisitka and Ramsarup, 2017). These pathways are numerous, multifaceted and inherently unique to each individual. Enabling a seamless learning pathway is complex and dependent upon a number of systems, including schooling, career guidance, post-school opportunities, training opportunities, workplace learning and work experience, as well as the formal system of skills provisioning.

The implementation of flexible learning pathways is a complex process, influenced by a number of factors at the national, institutional and even individual level. At the policy level, flexible learning pathways refer to the possibilities that learners have to transition between different stages and programmes of formal and non-formal learning, while acknowledging the importance of informal learning. Moreover, they exemplify the growing complexity of the learning landscape as education providers shift from highly demanding (both in terms of time and resources) credentials and certifications to macro-degrees (typically broad-based qualifications that can be shown through a degree or a certification) and micro-credentials (also referred to as alternative credentials, digital badges and micro-certifications, among many others, and covering two main aspects: learning activities that lead to a credential and the credential itself [European Commission, 2020]). Overall, an adequate mix of policies and steering instruments is needed to create an enabling environment for flexible learning pathways. These holistic systems should be made up of ‘building blocks’ that meet the needs of different learner groups, including the most disadvantaged, and are essential for the operationalization of lifelong learning.

Learning pathways rely on ‘articulation’, which can be defined as a ‘set of actual connections between different learning pathways at the horizontal level, and the vertical transitions from one level to the next’ (Hoppers, 2009). It is an essential principle for creating an integrated system of flexible pathways. Articulation creates the ‘bridges’ and ‘ladders’ that allow people to move through the system in accordance with their (changing) circumstances and needs. It can be visualized in national qualifications frameworks as well as in the mechanisms for the recognition, validation and accreditation of non-formal and informal learning outcomes (RVA).

More specifically, articulation can be grouped into three distinct categories: systemic, specific and individual. At the systemic level, articulation refers to linking existing qualifications, professional designations and programmes for workplace learning (among others) in and across national education systems. To operationalize systemic frameworks, specific articulation mechanisms are needed, including RVA, credit accumulation and transfer schemes (CAT), and memorandums of understanding, among other inter-institutional arrangements. At the individual level, articulation comprises diverse forms of learner support, such as support on learning-and-work pathways through career advice, flexible learning and teaching provision, as well as a variety of supportive programmes and structures.

By promoting opportunities for second-chance schooling and equivalency programmes, flexible learning pathways ensure openness, inclusiveness and flexibility in the education system, enabling ways forward without dead ends. As mentioned, flexible learning pathways can be articulated in national (and regional) qualifications frameworks as well as in regulations and mechanisms for RVA. Flexible learning pathways lie at the heart of lifelong learning: by facilitating the interconnectedness of initiatives across formal, non-formal and informal learning modalities, they make learning systems more comprehensive so that they are better able to meet the needs of learners.

3.4.1. National and regional qualifications frameworks

In the twenty-first century, with globalization, technological advancements, migration and other trends affecting the world around us, relations between education, training and work have evolved and become increasingly complex. National qualifications frameworks (NQFs) have been developed globally in response to this as they classify qualifications by level, based on learning outcomes. This classification reflects the content and profile of qualifications – that is, what the holder of a certificate or diploma is expected to know, understand and apply. The learning outcomes approach also ensures that education and training sub-systems are open to one another: this allows people to move more easily between education and training institutions and sectors (Cedefop et al., 2017).

NQFs can be found in countries around the world, irrespective of their development status and economic strength. In most cases, NQFs not only classify qualifications; they invariably imply a vision that redefines the way qualifications relate to one another and how they are applied and valued in societies. Regional qualifications frameworks (RQFs) are regional equivalents to NQFs, which can be found in the Asia-Pacific region, Europe, the Caribbean and Africa. By providing an overarching framework for classifying qualifications, RQFs simplify the process of linking qualifications across countries.

The number of NQFs has grown rapidly. An overview of national and regional frameworks is captured in the Global Inventory of Regional and National Qualifications Frameworks (Cedefop et al., 2019). In the 2017 report for this global inventory, it was confirmed that ‘more than 150 countries worldwide are now developing and implementing qualifications frameworks’ (Cedefop et al., 2017, p. 8) and, in 2019, ‘numbers of frameworks, national and regional, remain stable, while implementation of most frameworks has deepened and widened since 2017’ (Cedefop et al., 2019, p. 9). Their initial emergence was informed by perceptions of fundamental changes in the global economy, which had implications for the traditional divide between education and training and for the formal recognition of workplace and life experience. These views complemented those of business and government, which saw qualifications frameworks as a means to make education more relevant to the workplace and as a steering mechanism by which the state could achieve social objectives such as educational reform and equity.

Despite the fact that the NQF has developed as a relatively uniform policy movement and that NQFs around the world share similarities as a result, it is possible to identify different types by analysing two criteria: objectives and scope. Depending on their objectives, NQFs may be classed as one (or a hybrid) of the following, as defined by Raffe (2013):

• A communications framework – its main aim is to improve the transparency of an existing system and make it more coherent by identifying potential pathways for learning progression without directly trying to change the system itself.
• A transformational framework – at the other end of the spectrum, this type of NQF aspires to establish a new qualifications system by envisioning how things should be, rather than how they are, in an attempt to move the existing system in that direction with a tighter, more centrally led outcomes-based design.
• A reforming framework – this type lies somewhere in-between the previous two. It pushes for changes to the existing qualifications system by, for example, increasing regulation, improving the consistency of standards and/or plugging current gaps in learning provision.

It is also possible to differentiate NQFs according to scope. Many NQFs are ‘comprehensive frameworks’, i.e. they capture qualifications belonging to all parts of the education and training sectors in a given country and often seek to integrate a variety of sub-frameworks, even if they feature different designs (ibid.).

Alternatively, some NQFs are ‘non-comprehensive’ and address only one sub-sector of education and/or training in the country. This is the case in Ghana, where the National TVET Qualifications Framework (NTVETQF) is the only NQF and, as its name suggests, covers only the TVET sub-sector. A limited scope does not, however, preclude an NQF from accommodating non-formal and informal learning outcomes: the second volume of the 2017 Global Inventory of Regional and National Qualifications Frameworks (Cedefop et al., 2017a) explains that Ghana’s NTVETQF supports the ‘validation of informal and non-formal learning’ and promotes ‘access to lifelong learning for all, especially those working in the informal economy’ (ibid., p. 225).

Box 3.11. LLL in practice Ghana’s NTVETQF Ghana’s National Qualifications Framework was formulated in 2012 to cover technical and vocational education training (TVET) and thus addresses both the country’s education sector and labour market. It is designed to both articulate existing qualifications available in the country and trigger a process of reform affecting education and the economy. The NTVETQF has the following objectives: To bring all post-basic, occupation-oriented qualifications together under a unified qualifications framework; To facilitate access to further education and training for individuals in technical and vocational occupations; To improve product and service quality by ensuring uniform standards of practice in trades and professions; To promote access to lifelong learning for all, especially those working in the informal economy. With these objectives, the aim is to create a standard of equivalence for, and articulation between, TVET-related qualifications at the basic level and beyond. The NTVETQF is designed to drive fundamental reform by widening access to further training and education, as well as precipitating an improvement in quality of services provided by the extensive informal economy in Ghana. The NQF acknowledges formal, non-formal and informal learning from a lifelong learning perspective and is coordinated by the Council for Technical and Vocational Education and Training (COTVET), which is a semi-autonomous body of the Ministry of Education. Sources: UIL, n.d.; Mikulec et al., 2020

Of the three learning modalities detailed in this handbook (formal, non-formal and informal), formal learning is more oriented towards certification and the awarding of qualifications. In recent years, qualifications from formal learning have been systematically classified and harmonized through NQFs in countries around the world. This is useful for learners who are enrolled in or have already completed formal learning programmes and are seeking further learning opportunities. However, the primary objective of an NQF is to assist the transitional processes between learning modalities and learning programmes. A major challenge in the ongoing formulation and reform of NQFs worldwide is thus the integration of qualifications or credentials that may be acquired, to at least some degree, through non-formal and informal learning. For this to happen – for such learning to be made visible and eventually validated and accredited – non-formal and informal learning outcomes require recognition.

3.4.2. Recognition, validation and accreditation of learning outcomes

The recognition, validation and accreditation of the outcomes of non-formal and informal learning (RVA) is one of the pillars of any lifelong learning policy. The UNESCO guidelines on RVA define it as a ‘practice that makes visible and values the full range of competences (knowledge, skills and attitudes) that individuals have obtained in various contexts, and through various means in different phases of their lives’, leading at times to the acknowledgement of their value in society (UIL, 2012, p. 8). It comprises three main elements:

• Recognition is a process of granting official status to learning outcomes and/or competences, which can lead to the acknowledgement of their value in society.
• Validation is confirmation by an approved body that learning outcomes or competences acquired by an individual have been assessed against reference points or standards through pre-defined assessment methodologies.
• Accreditation is a process by which an approved body awards qualifications (certificates, diplomas or titles); grants equivalences, credit units or exemptions; or issues documents such as portfolios of competences on the basis of an assessment of learning outcomes and/or competences according to different purposes and methods. In some cases, ‘accreditation’ applies to the evaluation of an institution or programme’s quality as a whole.

While UNESCO has been using the term RVA to refer to skills recognition, there is a wide array of terms to describe recognition and validation practices across countries. In the United States of America, for example, RVA is referred to as prior learning assessment and recognition (PLAR). In the UK, the terms accreditation of prior learning (APL) and accreditation of prior experiential learning (APEL) are used. Other commonly used terms are recognition of prior learning (RPL) and validation of prior learning (VPL).

Box 3.12. LLL in practice Overarching approach to validation in France In France, the Validation des Acquis de l’Expérience (validation of experience or VAE) system has been maintained with national legislation and decrees since 2002; it thus has a clearly defined legal framework and exists as an individual’s legal right. The system facilitates the RVA of non-formal and informal learning outcomes by providing a route towards qualification acquisition for individuals who have engaged in and completed a learning experience without receiving some form of certification. Instances of previous learning in a range of contexts can therefore result in the achievement of part or all of a qualification through the VAE system. As a legal right, individual employees may take training leave to pursue recognition through the VAE system, while employers can initiate collective VAE processes for groups of employees. Such processes may also be implemented with individuals seeking employment. VAE in France applies to many different types of qualification, whether vocationally oriented or as products of general education, including qualifications given or accredited by government ministries, and sectoral qualifications such as the Certificat de Qualification Professionnelle (certificate of professional qualification or CQP). The VAE system connects individuals with the wider European education system and labour market: the qualifications it leads to are found in France’s national qualification directory (RNCP) and correlate to levels three to eight of the European Qualifications Framework (EQF). Furthermore, VAE is widely regarded as a strong system because its qualifications are equal in value to those achieved by participants of formal vocational education and training programmes. The validation procedure is comprehensive and includes the identification, documentation and assessment of learning outcomes, followed by an official certification of learning awarded by a jury. As of 2017, more than 307,000 qualifications had been awarded as a result of VAE and approximately 1,300 qualifications were accessible through the system. Source: Cedefop et al., 2017

RVA is a crucial step towards the realization of lifelong learning and has many advantages for learners. At its core is the principle that there is value in providing visibility to previously unrecognized learning outcomes, not least because it may boost learners’ self-esteem and motivation to continue learning, which, in turn, leads to greater well-being and potentially more job opportunities (UIL, 2012). RVA may also help to integrate broader sections of the population (e.g. early school leavers and workers in the informal economy) into an open and flexible education and training system and thus contributes towards building an inclusive society.

To operationalize RVA, the UNESCO guidelines (UIL, ibid.) identify six key areas of action at national level: (1) establishing RVA as a key component of a national lifelong learning strategy, (2) developing RVA systems that are accessible to all, (3) making RVA integral to education and training systems, (4) creating a coordinated national structure involving all stakeholders, (5) building the capacities of RVA personnel, and (6) designing sustainable funding mechanisms. Today, evidence of good practices to advance RVA can be found in countries around the world.

While many countries have started the process of developing national frameworks and mechanisms for RVA, the ways in which they are established vary widely at national, regional and local levels. To provide an overview of national approaches, regulations and governance mechanisms for RVA, UIL has established a global observatory with country profiles (UIL, 2022a). A set of specific case studies from different sectors complements the observatory by offering insights into RVA practices and challenges around the world.

As the observatory shows, influencing factors include national contexts and the degrees of involvement of government bodies, private sector organizations and individuals. Consequently, different forms of governance are evident in different countries: examples include social partnership models, stakeholder models, and RVA coordination through NQFs. Some countries, such as Norway,[1]  have established national institutes under their respective ministries of education, which cooperate with trade unions, enterprises, colleges, universities and others. Some of their roles include developing guidelines for validation towards enrolment in tertiary vocational education and exemption in higher education. Such arrangements recall the features of multi-stakeholder governance arrangements for LLL policy-making (see Chapter 2).

Linking the efforts of all stakeholders and national authorities is essential for delivering access to education and recognition of a wide range of competences. RVA demands that systems work together to allow learner mobility between different programmes associated with education, training and work. Building the professional expertise and capacities of educators, assessors, counsellors and administrators involved in RVA is another important dimension of ensuring the quality of RVA processes and procedures (Cooper and Ralphs, 2016).

Information, guidance and counselling services clarify RVA procedures for individuals and ensure that opportunities for RVA are actually used by learners. Such support structures introduce individuals to recognition practices and benefits, along with how they work and how to prepare for them. Support should be easily accessible for all, online and face-to-face, and should reach out to the most disadvantaged groups in particular.

Financing and legislation to incentivize RVA varies widely among countries. In France, for example, recognition of prior learning is a constitutional right, which in turn secures basic funding. In other instances, RVA is an unfunded mandate which institutions choose to cross-subsidize. While different lifelong learning elements may lend themselves to shared financing by way of donor grants and public partnerships, allocation of real public funding to support RVA is essential in most national contexts. Achieving adequately funded and coordinated RVA mechanisms takes dedicated political, pedagogical and organizational work by lifelong learning champions and advocates.

Box 3.13. LLL in practice RVA for migrants and refugees RVA of non-formal and informal learning outcomes is a critical element of lifelong learning. Singh (2018) highlights the value of RVA to refugees, explaining that it is a ‘means of empowering them, for example to gain a qualification, to enter employment or to escape poverty and social exclusion’ (ibid., p. 13). However, many recognition systems are still too underdeveloped or fragmented to meet migrants’ needs. In a survey of 13 European countries, only a minority of highly educated migrants had applied for recognition; they may be unable or unwilling to invest in complex, time-consuming and costly processes. Furthermore, the procedures and agencies involved in official recognition and validation vary between regulated and non-regulated professions. Identifying, documenting, assessing and certifying skills and competences involves multiple government departments and sub-national authorities. Recognition bodies are frequently disconnected from bodies responsible for integration and employment. In 2012, Germany passed a federal law to streamline recognition of professional qualifications. Foreign nationals can gain recognition regardless of residence status or citizenship. They can make a legal claim for recognition and receive a decision within three months. Professional qualifications obtained abroad are checked for compatibility with German professional requirements. In addition to passing laws to improve RVA systems, national and regional governments can introduce measures to ensure assessment agencies, licensing bodies and academic institutions harmonize requirements and adhere to best practice. For example, Ontario (Canada) introduced a ‘fairness commissioner’ in 2007 to ensure fair access to regulated professions for those with foreign qualifications. In four countries hosting Syrian refugees – Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey – processes are underway for the development of national qualifications frameworks, so that qualifications based on learning outcomes and competences across all learning modalities – formal, non-formal and informal – are recognized. Sources: Singh, 2018; Lodigiani and Sarli, 2017; OECD, 2014; Cedefop, 2016; Owen and Lowe, 2008

3.4.3. Flexible learning pathways in LLL implementation strategies

Facilitated by NQFs and RVA, flexible learning pathways are designed to provide different learning options to communities needing to achieve relevant knowledge, recognize previous experiences or transition into and between learning programmes within and across different learning modalities. Establishing a holistic system of flexible learning pathways to ensure continuity of learning throughout life is a complex effort requiring national regulations; stakeholder commitment in the field of education, training and work; and sufficient funding. Capacity development of RVA practitioners, quality assurance mechanisms, and accessible information and guidance services for learners are also crucial to ensure the effectiveness of learning pathways. Table 3.4 features some of the aspects to be considered when designing an implementation strategy that addresses flexible learning pathways.

Table 3.4. Key considerations for LLL implementation strategies – flexible learning pathways

National frameworks and mechanisms	Integrate RVA as a key pillar in the national lifelong learning policy or strategy. Establish an NQF and link RVA arrangements to it. Establish regulating bodies and a national coordination point to implement flexible pathways (provision, advocacy, quality assurance, monitoring). Develop approaches to increase interaction between educational institutions, enterprises and the civil society sector to translate learning outcomes from working and life experiences into credits and/or qualifications.
Accessibility and support structures	Develop procedures that identify, document, assess, validate and accredit learning outcomes, particularly those gained outside of formal education and training institutions. Make use of both formative assessment (identification and documentation of the learning progress) and summative assessment (validation of learning outcomes leading to qualification). Offer information, guidance and counselling services to clarify RVA procedures and available learning pathways to all individuals, accessible online and face-to-face. Provide special support with flexible arrangements to disadvantages groups. Provide a single-entry point for RVA procedures and services to facilitate coordination and coherence.
Stakeholder involvement	Ensure all stakeholders have clearly defined roles and responsibilities when designing, implementing and assuring quality of the RVA system. Communicate the benefits of RVA processes to employers and education and training providers to enhance transparency and acceptance. Create multi-stakeholder partnerships between public, private and community-based stakeholders to develop sustainable cost-sharing mechanisms.
Quality assurance and staff development	Establish a training system for RVA personnel to enhance their abilities to manage and conduct the assessment and validation processes in their specific socio-economic contexts. Establish quality assurance mechanisms to ensure that assessment tools and instruments are valid, reliable and fair. Put in place effective administrative processes for receiving applications, organizing assessment and providing feedback on outcomes, recording results, awarding qualifications and designing appeal processes.
Funding mechanisms	Provide sufficient financial resources to build the basic infrastructure of the RVA system. Establish a sustainable financing formula that results in fair cost distribution between the state, employers and individuals funding RVA implementation. Make special provision for access to RVA arrangements at a reduced rate or free of charge for vulnerable groups and individuals. Conduct cost-benefit analyses to develop evidence of the benefits of RVA for individuals, enterprises, education institutions and society as a whole.

Sources: UIL, 2012; Bertelsmann Stiftung, 2019

---

[1] Skills Norway is the Directorate for Lifelong Learning in Norway and is part of the Ministry of Education and Research (https://www.kompetansenorge.no/english/).