Upload
vanngoc
View
218
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
SQUARE
Self-evaluationandPeerReviewProtocolMarch2016
ThisprotocoldescribesthequalityassurancemechanismdevelopedwithinSQUARE,
the‘SystemofQualityAssurancefortheRecognitionNetworks’project.
ThistoolisprimarilydesignedtobenefityourENIC-NARICcentre,toimproveyour
centre’spracticefollowingtheinternationalcriteriaoftheLRCandtakinginto
accountyourcentre’sspecificmandate.TheSQUAREqualityassurancemechanism
shouldberegardedasavoluntaryexercise.
Thisdocumentexplainshowtocompletetheself-evaluationandthepeerreview.
TheSQUAREinstrumentsTheSQUAREqualityassurancemechanismisbasedontwoparts:1- A self-evaluation tool for ENIC-NARICs to enable an ENIC-NARIC centre to
objectively assess their recognition practice according to a set of Standards &
GuidelinesthatarebasedontheLisbonRecognitionConvention(LRC), theEAR
manualandthejointENIC-NARICCharter;
2- Apeerreviewmechanism,involvingexternalexpertswhowillreviewyourcentre
basedonyourself-evaluation.
Youshouldconsidertheself-evaluationtobeaninternalinformationgathering,critical
reflectionandanalysisonthepolicies,processesandproceduresofyourcentre,andthe
peerreviewasanexternalassessmentofyourorganization/unitcarriedoutbyexternal
reviewers.Youcouldcomparetheself-evaluationwithaninternalauditandthepeerreview
asanexternalaudit.
Background
The ENIC-NARIC networks base theirwork on several key documents that provide
recommendationsforgoodpractice:
§ TheConventionontheRecognitionofQualificationsconcerningHigherEducation
intheEuropeanRegion(alsoknownasLisbonRecognitionConvention,Councilof
EuropeandUNESCO1997)anditssubsidiarytextsprovidethelegalgroundsfor
recognitionpolicyandpractices.
§ In2004thejointENIC-NARICcharteroutlinedthetermsofoperationoftheENIC-
NARICnetworks including the tasks,activities, resources, levelofexpertiseand
staffrequirements.
§ TheEuropeanAreaforRecognition(EAR)manual,basedontheLisbonRecognition
Convention, outlines good practice for international recognition and provides
clear recommendations for fair recognition of qualifications. Themanual was
2
published in January 2012 and in April 2012 its use was endorsed in the
communiquéoftheBucharestMinisterialEHEAConference.
SQUAREenablesENIC-NARICstoassesstheextenttowhichtheyworkaccordingto
thisinternationallyagreedgoodpractice,andtoimprovetheirpracticewhereneeded.
As such SQUARE contributes to fair and smooth recognition and towards further
cooperationintherecognitionarea.
3
Part1-Self-evaluationTheself-evaluationisdevelopedtoenableENIC-NARICscentrestocriticallyreflecttowhich
extendtheycomplywiththegoodpracticeagreeduponwithinthenetworks,andtoimprove
wherenecessaryandtoenhancewherepossible.
The self-evaluation tool is intended to help analyse your current practice, identify
strengths and weaknesses and suggest the action points needed to improve the
qualityofyourcentre.
Belowyouwillfind:
§ Adescriptionoftheself-evaluationtool;
§ Instructionsonhowtoundertaketheself-evaluation.
Theself-evaluationtoolconsistsof:
§ 6standardsandguidelinestoevaluateyourENIC-NARICcentre;
§ AtemplatetoperformashortSWOTanalysis.
1. Descriptionoftheself-evaluationtoolTheself-evaluationtoolconsistsoftwosteps:
1. Analysisofcompliancewiththestandardsandguidelinesforgoodpractice
Thepurposeistogatherdata,reflectandestablishtheextenttowhichtheexisting
practicesandproceduresofyourcentrecomplywiththestandardsandguidelines
forgoodpractice.ThesestandardsarebasedmainlyontheEARManual,combined
withsomeelementsoftheENIC-NARICCharter.
2. AshortStrengthsWeaknessesOpportunitiesandThreats(SWOT)analysisTheaimoftheSWOTanalysis istoenableyourcentreto indicate itsstrengths,
weaknesses and areas for improvement, and furthermore to formulate action
pointsforthenearfuture.
Dependingonthesituation,yourcentremightopttoonlyperformthefirstpartofthe
self-evaluation, which would result in documentation and verification of your
compliancewiththestandardsandguidelines.Thesecondpart(theSWOTanalysis)
wouldresultinacriticalself-assessmentofyourcentre’srecognitionpractice,leading
toanactionplantoimprovetheperformanceofyourcentre.Itishighlyrecommended
toconductbothpartsoftheself-evaluation.
1.1 FrequencyBoth steps can be completed regularly providing your centre with a robust and
evidence-based internalqualityassurancesystem. Ingeneral it is recommendedto
conducttheself–evaluationevery3to5years.However,thistimeframecanchange
dependingon:
4
§ GoalssetinapreviousSWOTanalysisoractionpointsresultingfromapeer
review.Dependingonthetimeneededtocompletethosegoals,onecandecide
ontheappropriatetimetoconductthenextself-evaluation.
§ Achangeinmandateofthecentre.Ifyourmandateisgoingtochange,you
mightpostponethenextself-evaluationuntilyouhavegainedsufficient
experiencewiththenewprocessesandprocedures.
2. Howtocompletetheself-evaluationtool?
It is advisable to involve variousmembers of your centre into the self-evaluation,
preferablyacombinationofatleastoneemployeewhoisactiveintheprimaryprocess
ofyourcentre(informationprovisionand/ortheevaluationprocess)andatleastone
managerand/ortheheadofoffice.Thetotalnumberofstaffinvolvedintheself-evaluation
should reflect the total number of staff and variety of tasks of your centre. It will take
approximatelyonetothreeworkingdaystocompletethefullself-evaluation.Pleasenotice
thatyoumightneedtospreadthehoursoverseveraldays.
2.1-Step1–Compliancetostandards
Part1oftheself-evaluationconsistsof6standards(annex2), includingatext-boxwith
guidelinesonhowtocomplywitheachofthestandards:
1. Procedures,CriteriaandQualityAssurance
2. Applicant-centredRecognition
3. Quality,LegitimacyandAuthenticity
4. EvaluationToolsandResources
5. TransparencyandInformationProvision
6. (Inter)nationalCooperationandPresentation
Relevanceofthestandardsandlevelofcompliancemaybeinfluencedbytheroleandremit
ofindividualcentres.Therefore,beforedoingtheself-evaluation,thecentresareinvited
tocompletethetypologyform(seeannex1).
2.1.1DescribingcompliancetostandardsYouwillbeaskedanopenquestiontoelaborateonhowyourcentrecomplieswith
eachofthestandards,takingintoaccountthespecificissuesraisedintheguidelines
accompanyingthestandards.Thishasseveralfunctions,it:
§ is the basis uponwhich you rate your overall compliance to the standard (see
followingparagraph);
§ givesyoutheopportunity todescribeyourpractice in relationto thestandard,
whichformsvaluableinputforthesecondpartoftheself-evaluation(theSWOT
analysis);
§ isveryusefultoreviewthisinformationthenexttimeyourcentreisgoingtofillin
theself-evaluationtool,toseewhetheryourpracticehas improvedorwhether
the circumstances under which your centre operates have changed (see also
frequencysectionabove).
5
Forafewstandards,itisexplicitlyrequestedtoprovideevidenceforhowthestandard
ismet.Ifthisisthecasethetextishighlightedinyellow.Pleasenote:
§ Youarestronglyencouragedtoalsoincludethistypeofevidencetosupportyour
description of compliance to other standards. Apart from including physical
examples,thisalsocanalsobedonebyreferringtopractice(s).
§ Especiallywhen you aim to undertake a peer reviewof your centre, providing
evidence is crucial as the peer review team may ask you to support your
statementswiththistypeofevidence.
Thesesupportdocumentsareveryusefulforfuturereferenceandthereforeyouare
advised to keep them on file (hard copy or electronic). Further note that one
document(e.g.acopyofyourstandardevaluationform)maycontainevidencefor
morethanonestandard.
2.1.2RatingcompliancetostandardsAfterdescribingandanalysingyourcompliance,youareexpectedtoindicatetowhich
extentyourcentrecomplieswiththestandardonascalefromonetofour:
1. Nocompliance
Thecentrefailstocomplywiththestandard.
2. Partialcompliance
Some aspects or parts of the standard are met, while others are not. The
interpretationofthestandardiscorrect,butthemannerofimplementationisnot
effectiveenough.
3. Substantialcompliance
Thecentreistoalargeextentinaccordancewiththestandard,thespirit/principle
ofwhichisfollowedinpractice.
4. Fullcompliance
Thecentreactsentirelyinaccordancewiththestandard,anditsimplementation
iseffective.
2.2Step2-SWOTanalysis
Part2oftheevaluationtoolconsistsoftheSWOTanalysis,forwhichatemplateisprovided
(seeannex3).
A SWOT analysis is a structured method to evaluate the Strengths, Weaknesses,
Opportunities,andThreatsofanorganisation.Itinvolvesspecifyingtheobjectivesof
theorganisationandidentifyingtheinternalandexternalfactorsthatarefavourable
andunfavourabletoachievingthoseobjectives.
InaSWOTanalysisyoushouldinvestigatetwothings:
§ isyourcompliancetoaparticularstandardmainlyinfluencedbyinternalor
externalcauses?
§ arethesecauseshelpfulorharmfultoachievingyourobjectives?
6
Bycombiningthesetwoanswers,youwillfindoutifthatparticularstandard
representsastrength,weakness,opportunityorthreatforyourcentre(seetable
below)
Itmaybewisetoprioritizethestandardswhichyoufeelaremostimportantforyour
centrebeforeundertakingtheSWOT,inordertomaketheSWOTanalysisasrelevant
aspossibleandnottooextensive.
Actionpoints
Asa resultof thisanalysisyou formulateactionpoints inorder toconvert internal
weaknessesofyourcentreintostrengths,andexternalthreatsintoopportunities.On
theotherhand,strengthsandopportunitiesthatalreadyexistatpresentmayleadto
actionpointsthatenableyourcentretocapitalizeonthem.
Theanalysisitselfshouldbenolongerthantwopagesandtheactionpointsshouldbe
clearlyformulated.
ExampleofaSWOTanalysisYourcentrehasscoredquitelow(2–partialcompliance)onstandard2(procedures,criteriaandqualityassurance).Sincethisstandardrepresentsan
essentialaspectoftheperformanceofyourcentre,youdecidetogiveitahigh
priorityandtakeittotheSWOTanalysis.
Youconcludethatrecognitioncriteriaarenotconsistentlyappliedbythestaffof
youroffice,becauseyourcentreislackingininternalguidelinesandwritten
procedurestoensureconsistency.Thisisaninternalcausewhichisnotbeneficialtotheperformanceofyourcentre,andthusconstitutesaweakness.Toturnthisweaknessintoastrengthyoudefinethefollowingactionpoint:based
7
ontherecommendationsoftheEARmanualyourcentrewilldevelopapractical
internalguidewithgoodpracticeonhowtodealwithcasesthataretypicalfor
yourowndailypractice.
Anothercentremightconcludethattheirpartialcompliancetostandard2ismainly
duetothefactthatnationallegislationmakesitdifficulttoapplycertaincriteriain
linewiththeLisbonRecognitionConvention.Thatwouldbeanexternalcausewhichis not beneficial and therefore constitutes a threat.Toturnthisthreatintoanopportunitythecentredefinesthefollowingactionpoint:the head of centre will initiate a regular biannual meeting with relevant policy
makersattheMinistryofEducationinwhichrecognitionissueswillbediscussed
withrespecttothecorrectapplicationofinternationallegislation(theLRC)andwith
theaimtobringnationalrecognitionpracticeinlinewiththerelevantactionpoints
ofthemostrecentEHEAMinisterialCommuniqué.
3. Publicationoftheself-evaluationPublicationoftheself-evaluationisondiscretionoftheENIC-NARICcentre.
8
Parttwo–PeerReview
Thispartoutlinesthepurpose,processandoutcomesofthepeerreviewexercise.
1. PurposeofpeerreviewApeerreviewisdefinedasanevaluationofscientific,academic,orprofessional
workbyothersworkinginthesamefield.Apeerreviewcanenhanceandaddvalue
toanENIC-NARIC’sself-evaluationbyintroducinganexternalandinternational
perspective.Inaddition,itcansupportandenhancetheCentre’sdevelopmentand
needsnationallyandinternationally.Forexample,ifitisagreedthatcertainaspects
oftheCentre’sperformanceneedtobeaddressedatpolicylevel,thesuggestionsfor
improvementmadeinthecontextofanexternalreviewcansendaconvincing
messagetotherelevantpolicymakers.
Itshouldbefurtheremphasisedthattheaimofthepeerreviewisnottoverifyor
provecompliancewiththestandards,buttobuildfurtherontheself-evaluationof
theCentreandcontributetotheCentre’scomplianceofitspracticesbyholding
fruitfuldiscussionswithpeersinthespiritofmutualtrustandsupport.
Insummary,peerreviewservesthefollowingpurposes:
§ Ensuringcomprehensiveunderstandingofallthestepsandstandardswithinthe
self-evaluationprocedure;
§ Validatingandenrichingtheoutcomesoftheself-evaluationprocedurethrough
discussionwithpeers;
§ Enhancingthenationalrole,visibilityandstatusoftheCentre;
§ Addinganinternationaldimensiontothequalityassuranceprocedure;
§ Providingfeedbackandrecommendationsregardingcurrentpractices.
2. ThePeerReviewProcessThisprotocolputsforwardaframeworkforthecoordinationofapeerreview
procedure.Itensuresthatbothparties(theENIC-NARICunderreviewandthe
reviewers)haveasharedunderstandingoftheprocessandenablesthemtostay
focussedandmanagetheirtimeeffectively.
2.1Frequency
IngeneralitisrecommendedtocarryoutapeerreviewofyourCentreevery5years.
However,thistimeframecandependonachangeinmandateofthecentreyour
centre.Ifyourmandateisgoingtochange,youmightpostponethenextpeerreview
untilthechangeshavebeenfullyimplemented.Ontheotherhand,ifdiscussions
9
aboutchangingthemandateareon-going,thepeerreviewcangivenewimpetus
andideasfordiscussions.
2.2TheReviewPanel
Thepeerreviewpanelconsistsofthreepersons.Twopersonsfromoneor(if
feasible)twodifferentENIC/NARICcentresandonenationalrecognitionexpertfrom
thecountryunderreview.Thereviewpanelshouldmeetthefollowing
requirements:
§ Thepanelshouldinclude:
o OnepersoninamanagementpositionatanENIC-NARIC;
o AnexperiencedcredentialevaluatorfromanENIC-NARIC;
o Anationalexpertwithagoodunderstandingofthenationalrecognition
structureaswellaswithaninternationaloutlook.
o Atleastoneperson(outofthethreepersonslistedabove)with
experienceinqualityassuranceprocesses.
§ AllpanellistsshouldhaveagoodunderstandingoftheLisbonRecognition
Conventionand/ortheEARmanual;
§ Ifthecountryunderreviewhasspecificpointsitwantstobereviewedfollowing
theSWOTanalysis,itispreferredtoincludeapanellistwithexpertiseinthese
particularfields(inadditiontotheabovementionedcriteria);
§ Theselectedindividualsforthereviewpanelareexpectedtoundertaketheir
taskwithacriticalandconstructiveview;
§ Thereshouldbenoconflictofinterestbetweenthemembersofthepaneland
thecentreunderreview(e.g.thepanelshouldnotincludepersonsworking
withinthecentreunderreview).
2.1.2ConstitutionofthereviewpanelThetwoENIC-NARICexpertsarenominatedbytheirrespectiveHeadofCenters
followingarequestfromthecentreunderreview.Theirresumes/CVsareforwarded
tothecentreunderreviewwhoselectstheexpertsbasedonthecriteriamentioned
above.
Next,thecentreunderreviewproposesanexternalnationalexperttothetwo
selectedENIC-NARICsexperts,whowillcheckwhetherthepersonmeetsthe
abovementionedcriteria.Uponapositiveconfirmation,theexpertjoinsthepeer
reviewteamasanequalmember.Iftheproposedexternalnationalexpertdoesnot
meettherequirements,thecentreneedstopresentanotherexpert.
Oncethereviewpaneliscreated,thepanelchoosesonepersontobeitschair.To
avoidconflictofinterestbetweenthecentreandtheexternalnationalexpert,the
chairhastobearepresentativefromtheENIC-NARIC.Thechair:
§ isthemainpointofcontactofthecentreunderreview;
§ shouldtakecarethatallmembersofthereviewpanelareuptodateaboutthe
communicationbetweenthepanelandthecentreunderreview;
10
§ isresponsibleforcoordinatingthepreparationsofthepeerreviewvisit,aswell
asthepreparationofthefinalreport;
§ shouldhaveexperiencewithqualityassuranceprocesses.
2.3Thesitevisit
Thissectioncontainsguidanceonthekeystepsandtimeframesforconductingasite
visit.
2.3.1PreparingthesitevisitThecentreunderreviewsubmitsthefollowingdocumentstothereviewpanelat
leastonemonthpriortothedateofthesitevisit:
§ aself-evaluationreport(completedusingtheself-evaluationtool1),
§ proposedsitevisitagenda,
§ resumes/roledescriptionsofthestaffmembersinvolvedinthepreparationof
theself-evaluationreport,
§ resumes/roledescriptionsofindividuals(internaland/orexternal)tobe
interviewedbythepeersduringthesitevisit.
Themembersofthereviewpanelacknowledgereceipttothecentreunderreview
andfamiliarisethemselveswiththedocuments.Thereviewpanelholdsa
preparatory(pre-visit)meeting/teleconference:
§ tosharefirstimpressionsregardingthereport;
§ tocheckifthereisanyinformationmissing
§ tocheckifthereisanadditionalneedforbackgroundinformationonthe
educationsystemand/orthelegalframework;
§ todiscusstheprogrammeofthevisitandfinalizetheagenda;
§ toagreeonthemainquestionstoberaisedateachinterview;
§ toidentifywhetherthestaffincludedintheprogrammemeetstheir
expectations,and,ifnot,whichstaffneedstobeadditionallyincludedinand/or
omittedfromtheprogramme;
§ toensuremutualunderstandingoftheobjectivesofthesitevisit.
Ifanyadditionalinformationisrequiredfromthecentre,orachangeinprogramme
isproposed,thereviewpanelnotifiesthecentreinduetimebeforethesitevisit.
2.3.2DuringthesitevisitThesitevisitisconductedaccordingtotheestablishedagenda.Thesitevisitis
supposedtobeconductedduringoneworkingdayandinvolvesthefollowingkey
stages:
1Recommendationsoncompletingtheself-evaluationreportcanbefoundintheintroductionand
instructionstotheself-evaluationtool.
11
Time(max) Action Who
20min(’20) Welcomeandshortintroductionfrom
thecentreunderreview.
§ Peerreviewteam
§ Centreunderreview
15min(’35) Closedmeeting Reviewpanelonly
45min(’80) Meetingwithmanagementofcentre
toclarifypartsofthereportrelatedto
thenationalandinternationalcontext
suchasregulatoryframeworks,policy
mattersandconcernswhichregular
staffcannotchangeorinfluence.
§ Reviewpanel
§ Managementteamof
Centre(includingHeadof
Centre)
15min(’95) Closedmeeting Reviewpanelonly
’45min(‘140) Meetingwiththemembersofstaffresponsiblefortheself-evaluation
toclarifyanyquestionsandissuesthe
peerreviewpanelhasinregardsto
(partsof)theself-evaluation.
§ Reviewpanel
§ Staffresponsibleforself-
evaluation
15min(’155) Closedmeeting Reviewpanelonly
45min(‘200) Meetingwithothermembersofstaff
(nooverlapallowedwithprevious
points)
§ Reviewpanel
§ Selectedstaffbyreview
panel
90min(‘290) Lunch:usedtodiscussmorning
outcomes(closedmeeting)
Reviewpanelonly
60min(‘350) Reflectiononfindings,formulationof
feedbackandpreliminaryrecommendationsforimprovement
Reviewpanel(closedmeeting)
30min(‘380) Finalmeetingwithmanagementfor
thereviewpaneltocheckthey
understoodeverythingcorrectlyandto
validatetheirfindingsand
considerations.
§ Reviewpanel
§ Managementteamof
Centre(includingHeadof
Centre)
15min
(‘395)
Closedmeeting Reviewpanelonly
15min
(‘410)
Feedbackmeetingtopresentmain
outcomestothecentre.
§ Reviewpanel
§ StaffENICNARICunder
review
2.3.3Afterthesitevisit
12
Withintwomonthsafterthevisit,thepeerreviewersfinalisetheconclusionsand
recommendationsandforwardthesetotheCentreintheformofapeerreview
report..TheCentrecanreportfactualmistakestothereviewpanelwithtwoweeks.
Iffeedbackisreceived,thereviewpanelfinalisesthereportwithinsixweeks.
3. AfterthePeerReviewAfterreceivingthepeerreviewreport,thecentreunderreviewshouldcarefully
considerandprioritisetherecommendations,formulatingconcretefollowupactions
inordertoaddressthemostpertinentissues.Theactionpointsresultingfromthe
peerreviewcansupplementand/orreinforcetheactionpointsformulated
previouslyduringtheself-evaluationphaseandinternalSWOTanalysis.
Thesubsequentprogressreportshouldprovideanaccountonactionstakenand
impactobserved.Thenextself-evaluationandpeerreviewprocedurescanhelpto
assesswhethertheactionpointshavebeenimplementedproperlyandwhat
improvementshavebeenmadeandaredesirableforthefuture.
13
Annex 1 - Typology
1. ABOUTTHECENTRE
§ Whatisthenameofyourcentre?
[pleaseprovidea)nameinoriginallanguage,b)itsofficialabbreviationandc)Englishtranslation]
§ WhenwasyourInformationcentreestablished?
[pleaseprovidea)month,b)year]§ AreyouanENICorENIC-NARIC?
□ENIC
□ENIC-NARIC
2. LEGALPOWERSANDSTATUS
Legalpowers
§ Theactivitiesofyourcentreare:
□regulatedbynationallaw[pleaseexplainhowandtowhichextent]□definedinamandategiventoyourcentre[pleaseprovideageneralandshortdescription]
§ Arethereanycontractualrequirementstobemetfortheservicesyourcentre
offers?
[pleaseprovidedetails]§ Howindependentisyourcentreinsettingitsownrecognitionpolicies?
[pleaseprovidedetails]
Legalstatus
§ Whatisthelegalstatusofyourcentre?Yourcentreis:
□apublicbody
□partoftheministryresponsibleforhighereducation:
□aseparateunit;
□notaseparateunit2
□accountable/answerabletoanyotherministryorgovernmentdepartment
□independentinstitution
□partofanotherlargerpublicorganization3[pleasedescribe]
□aprivatebody
□notforprofit
2 Functionsassignedtostaffalongsideotherfunctions. 3 E.g.nationalrectors’conference,university,etc.
14
□independentinstitution
□partofanotherlargerprivatenot-for-profitorganization4[pleasedescribe]
□profit-oriented
□independentinstitution
□partofanotherlargerprivatefor-profitorganization[pleasedescribe]
3. REMITANDSCOPEOFSERVICES
§ Whatservicesareofferedbyyourcentre?
□Evaluationofinternationalqualifications.
ü Areyourstatements/evaluations:
□legallybinding:
□Recognitionforfurtherstudy
□Recognitionforaccesstoregulatedprofessions
□Recognitionforaccesstonon-regulatedprofessions
□Recognitionforemployment5
□arecommendation/advice:
□Recognitionforfurtherstudy
□Recognitionforaccesstoregulatedprofessions
□Recognitionforaccesstonon-regulatedprofessions
□Recognitionforemployment6
□Informationoninternationalqualifications7
□Statementsoninternationalqualifications8
ü Whichapplicantsarerequestingyourstatements/evaluations?
□Individuals
□Educationinstitutions:
□tertiary
□post-secondarynon-tertiary
□Uppersecondary
□Employers
□Ministries
□Other:[pleasespecify]
□Onlinedatabaseforyourapplicants.
[pleasedescribewhattypeofdatabases:a)whatinformation,b)forwhichtargetgroupandc)iffreeofcharge]
□Providetrainingtothirdparties.
4 E.g.educationalexchangessupportoffice,internationaleducationfoundation,etc. 5
Incaseofformalrequirementstothelevelofaqualificationforaccesstonon-regulatedprofessions.6 Idem. 7 E.g.informationongenericlevel,includinge.g.referencestowebsitesanddatabases.8 Objectiveinformationwithoutevaluation,e.g.accreditationstatus,level,workload,purposeand/orlearning
outcomes,withoutevaluating/comparingthem.
15
[pleasedescribewhatkindoftraining,towhichtargetgroups?]□Research,
□Projects
□Conferencesandseminars
□Publications
□Other:[pleasespecify]
4. STATISTICS
Numberofenquiries
§ Howmanyenquiries,statementsand/orevaluationsdoesyourcentreprocess
annually?9
[pleaseincludenumber]§ Doyouexpectsignificantincreasesordecreasesinthenumbers,orchangesin
thetypeofenquiries/evaluationsintheupcoming3years?10[pleasedescribe]
Humanresources
§ Howmanymembersofstaffareemployedbyyourcentre?
ü Totalnumbersofpersonsandfulltimeequivalent(FTE)ofstaff:[pleaseincludea-numbersandb-fte]
ü Totalpersonsandfteworkingforyourcentre:
- Leadership11:[pleaseincludea)numberandb)fte]
- Policyadvisor(s):[pleaseincludea)numberandb)fte]- Credentialevaluator(s):[pleaseincludea)numberandb)fte]- Administrativestaff
12[pleaseincludea)numberandb)fte]
- Other13:[pleasespecifyanda)includenumberandb)fte]
ü Fromtheabovecategories,howmanypersonsandfteareofficiallyemployed
outsideyourcentre14?[pleaseincludea)numberandb)fte]
Finances
§ Howaretheservicesofyourcentrefinanced?
□Publicfunds
□Privatefunds15
□Both.Pleasespecify:
□%offundsfrompublicfunding:
9 Provideanindication,e.g.basedontheaverageoflast5years. 10 E.g.levelofeducation/qualification,countryoforiginofeducation/qualification,specificaspectsofeducation/qualifications.11 HeadofOrganization,DeputyHead. 12
E.g.Finance,law,PublicRelationsandHumanResources 13 E.g.maintenance,ITsupport,etc 14 E.g.elsewhereinorganization,orcontractedoutsidecentre 15 E.g.throughfeestoindividualsand/orclientsforservicesprovided
16
□structural:[pleasespecify%]
□non-structural16:[pleasespecify%]
□%privatefunding:[pleasespecify%]
16 E.g.tenders
17
Annex 2 - Standards and Guidelines
Standard 1 – Procedures, Criteria and Quality Assurance
The ENIC/NARIC office aligns its recognition criteria and procedures with
establishedgoodpractice,reviewsitsproceduresonaregularbasis,andensuresthatthecriteriaareconsistentlyapplied.
Guidelines
§ RecognitioncriteriaandproceduresareinlinewiththeLisbonRecognition
Conventionandsubsidiarytexts17(especiallythe(revised)Recommendationon
CriteriaandProceduresfortheAssessmentofForeignQualifications),aswellas
withothergoodpracticeascollectedintheEuropeanAreaofRecognition
manual18;
§ Recognitioncriteriaandproceduresarereviewedonaregularbasisinorderto
adapttodevelopmentsintheeducationalfieldandinthefieldofrecognition
(e.g.theintroductionofnewtoolssuchasthenationalqualifications
frameworks).Sourcesofinputforreviewingrecognitionpracticeareapplicants,
clientsandstakeholders;
§ TheENIC/NARICofficehastools(e.g.internalguidelines,writtenproceduresand
internalhandbooksforitsemployees)toensurethequalityofitsprocedures.
Mechanismsareinplacetocheckwhethertheinformationandevaluations
providedtoapplicantsandclientsisappropriateandtoguaranteethat
recognitioncriteriaareappliedconsistentlyfromonecasetothenextandfrom
oneemployeetothenext.
Pleaseprovideyouranswertostandard1inthisbox,usingtheguidelinefollowedbyanindicationoftheoverallcomplianceCOMPLIANCESTANDARD11. □Nocompliance
2. □Partialcompliance
3. □Substantialcompliance
4. □Fullcompliance
17SeeforfullConventionandSubsidiarytexts:enic-naric.net:http://www.enic-naric.net/the-lisbon-
recognition-convention-97.aspx18http://www.enic-naric.net/ear-manual-standards-and-guidelines-on-recognition.aspx
18
Standard 2 - Applicant-centred Recognition
Foreignqualificationsareevaluatedbasedonthepurposeforwhichrecognition
is sought and recognized unless there is a substantial difference. Learning
outcomestakeprecedenceintheevaluation.Analternativeformofrecognition
isgrantedifpossiblewherefullrecognitioncannotbegranted.Thereshouldbea
process in place that enables the applicants to appeal against the recognition
decision.Allpersonsinarefugee(like)situationholdingaqualificationwithoutdocumentationareabletohavetheirqualificationsassessed.
Guidelines
§ The purpose of recognition (academic, occupational/professional) is taken into
account and the qualification is assessed in a flexiblemanner, focusing on the
requirements thatare relevant for thisspecific recognitionpurpose. Ideally the
evaluationorstatementissuedincludesthepurposeofrecognition.
§ Foreignqualificationsarerecognizedunlessthereisasubstantialdifference,by:
o focusingon the fivekeyelements that togethermakeupaqualification
(level,workload,quality,profileandlearningoutcomes)
o comparingtheforeignqualificationtotherelevantnationalqualification
requiredforthedesiredactivity
o determining whether the main requirements relevant for the desired
activity are sufficiently covered by the outcomes of the foreign
qualification.
§ Qualificationsareassessedagainstlearningoutcomesasmuchaspossible.Inthe
absenceofclearstatementsoflearningoutcomes,thefollowingmaybe
consultedasanindicatoroftheoutputofaqualification:purpose,content,rights
attachedandorientation(e.g.research-basedorprofessionallyoriented).
§ Wheresubstantialdifferencesare identified,provideawell-foundedstatement
outlining the substantial differences between the foreign qualification and the
homeoneandseektoofferalternative,partialorconditionalrecognitionofthe
qualification.
§ Theapplicantisinformedaboutthepossibilitytoappealagainsttherecognition
decision.Inthecaseofanappeal,theoriginallyprovidedapplicationtogether
withnewinformation-ifprovidedbytheapplicant-isre-examined.
§ Withinsufficientdocumentation,theassessmentofaqualificationofapersonin
arefugee(like)situationisbasedonabackgroundpaper.Ifdeemednecessary,
interviewsareconductedwithstaffofhighereducationinstitutionsandspecial
examinationsorswornstatementsbeforealegallycompetentauthorityare
arranged.Refugeesareexemptedfrompayinganyassessmentfees.
NB:Pleaseprovideanexampleofhowyourofficereportstheexistenceofsubstantial
differencestoanapplicantoradmissionsofficer.
PleaseincludethisinformationasanAnnextoyourself-evaluationdocument.
19
Pleaseprovideyouranswertostandard2inthisbox,usingtheguidelinefollowedbyanindicationoftheoverallcomplianceCOMPLIANCESTANDARD21. □Nocompliance
2. □Partialcompliance
3. □Substantialcompliance
4. □Fullcompliance
Standard 3 – Quality, Legitimacy and Authenticity
Thequalityandlegitimacyofaqualificationisassessedbyverifyingthatitisquality
assuredandawardedinaccordancewithapplicableprovisionsandrequirements.
Qualityassuranceandaccreditationsystemsareconsideredassufficientevidence
ofcompliancewithqualitystandards.Theauthenticityofsubmitteddocuments,
incaseofreasonabledoubt,shouldbecheckedusinginternaland, ifnecessary,externalverificationmethods.
Guidelines
§ The status of the awarding institution and programme is checked with the
appropriateauthoritiestoensurethattheprogrammeisofsufficientqualityand
tolinkittoanationaleducationsystem.Thefollowinginformationistakeninto
account:
o which national authorities are responsible for accreditation/quality
assurance;
o whethertheaccreditationisatinstitutionalorprogrammelevel;
o whatistheaccreditationstatusoftheinstitutionand/orprogrammewhen
thequalificationwasawarded.
The informationsuppliedby institutionsand individuals is cross-checkedwith
otherofficialsources.
§ Qualificationsbasedonnon-traditionallearning(suchasflexiblelearningpaths,
recognitionofprior learning (RPL),open/distance learning)are treated in the
same way as traditional qualifications. If qualifications are based on
transnationallearning,additionalprovisionsand/orrequirementsmaybetaken
into account, such as whether transnational providers have permission to
operatebybothreceiving(host)andsending(home)countriesandadhereto
other principles outlined in the legislationof both countries and theCodeof
20
Good Practice for the Provision of Transnational Education19 and in theGuidelinesforQualityProvisioninCross-borderHigherEducation20.
§ Since the procedures for quality assurance and accreditation of joint
programmesarestillbeingdeveloped,acertainamountofflexibilityisexercised
inassessingthestatusof jointprogrammes.IntheEuropeancontext,asingle
accreditation of the entire joint programme is considered to be sufficient
evidence for thequality [ref6=EuropeanApproach forQualityAssuranceof
Joint Programmes (October 2014)]. In other cases, it may be necessary to
investigate thestatusof the institutions involved in the jointprogrammeand
statusofthejointprogrammeinallparticipatingcountries.
§ Incaseaqualificationortheawardinginstitutionisnon-recognised,itmaystill
beusefultoinvestigateitslegitimacybytakingintoaccountanyinformationof
athirdparty’squalityassessment.Ifrelevantinformationisfound,astatement
oranadvicemaybeissuedexplainingthestatusoftheinstitution/qualification
in caseswhere it is confirmed legitimate (butnotofficially recognisedby the
nationaleducationalauthorities).
§ The authenticity of submitted documents is checked using internal and, if
necessary,externalverificationmethods.Theinternalinformationmanagement
couldincludeadatabaseofsamplesofbothgenuineandfraudulentdocuments,
a glossary of common terms, information on the formats and contents of
educationaldocumentationandinternalrecordsofcountry-specificverification
procedures.External informationmanagementmightconsistofcheckingwith
relevant authorities/awarding bodies and requesting and examining original
documentsifnotprovidedinitially.
NB:Pleaseprovideanexampleofhowyourofficeverifiedthequalityandlegitimacy
of a qualification. Exampleswithqualifications,which required additional research
and/orconsiderations,arepreferred.
PleaseincludethisinformationasanAnnextoyourself-evaluationdocument.
Pleaseprovideyouranswertostandard3inthisbox,usingtheguidelinefollowedbyanindicationoftheoverallcomplianceCOMPLIANCESTANDARD31. □Nocompliance
2. □Partialcompliance
3. □Substantialcompliance
4. □Fullcompliance
19SeeforfullConventionandSubsidiarytexts:enic-naric.net:http://www.enic-naric.net/the-lisbon-
recognition-convention-97.aspx20SeeforfullConventionandSubsidiarytexts:enic-naric.net:http://www.enic-naric.net/the-lisbon-
recognition-convention-97.aspx
21
Standard 4 - Evaluation Tools and Resources
Relevant and up to date information on recognition and education systems is
activelycollected.NationalQualificationFrameworkswhereavailableareusedas
atransparencytoolforunderstandingthelevel,learningoutcomesandworkload
offoreignqualifications.Creditsareacceptedasanindicationoftheamountof
studyandthedistributionofgradeswithinaparticulareducationsystemistakenintoaccountwhenrequiredorappropriate.
Guidelines
§ Up-to-dateinformationiscollectedonrelevanttopics,suchaseducationsystems,
qualifications awarded in different countries and their comparability to the
qualificationsinthehomecountry,legislationonrecognition,officiallyrecognised
and accredited institutions, admission requirements, recognition conventions,
bilateralagreements,EUDirectives,andotherrelevantbodies.
§ Adatabaseonpreviousevaluationsismaintained,inordertoensureconsistency
infutureevaluations.
§ National qualifications frameworks are used as a key source of information to
establish the level, generic learning outcomes and workload of foreign
qualifications.Whereanationalqualificationframeworkhasbeenreferencedtoa
metaframework(e.g.EQF),thisisalsotakenintoaccount.
§ Information is collectedon themanydifferent typesof credit systems thatare
used by higher education institutions all over theworld,which are sometimes
limited to an individual institution ormay be applied across different national
educationsystems(e.g.ECTS).Creditsareespeciallyrelevantintherecognitionof
periodsofstudy.
o Foreigncreditsareacceptedforwhattheyrepresentintheirownsystem.
o Credits obtained from various sources (and lacking the framework of a
coherent programme) do not have to be added up and accepted as a
“qualification”.
§ The grades obtained by a studentmay have an impact on the evaluation of a
qualification,especiallyiftheaveragegradeofaqualificationdeterminestheright
ofaccesstofurtherstudyintheeducationsystemwhereitwasawarded.Since
the distribution of grades may vary greatly between education systems, the
statisticaldistributionofgradesinbotheducationsystemsshouldbetakeninto
accountwhenconvertingforeigngrades.
NB:Pleaseprovideexamplesofhowyourofficeusesnationalqualification
frameworks,evaluatesgradesandacknowledgescredit.
PleaseincludethisinformationasanAnnextoyourself-evaluationdocument.
22
Pleaseprovideyouranswertostandard4inthisbox,usingtheguidelinefollowedbyanindicationoftheoverallcomplianceCOMPLIANCESTANDARD45. □Nocompliance
6. □Partialcompliance
7. □Substantialcompliance
8. □Fullcompliance
Standard 5 - Transparency and Information Provision
Informationon the recognitionprocedureandcriteria is clear,accurate,up-to-
dateandreadilyaccessible forapplicants, stakeholdersandthegeneralpublic,andclearinformationonthestatusoftheirapplicationisprovidedtoapplicants.
Guidelines
§ Informationprovidedisaccessible,user-friendly(relevantanddesignedfornon-
expert users), available in a variety of forms (website, by phone and e-mail,
hardcopy brochures), available in at least one international widely spoken
language,regularlyupdatedandfreeofcharge.
§ Theinformationconsistsof:
o a description of the national education system, recognition system,
competent recognition authorities, assessment criteria, roles of the
applicant, ENIC/NARIC and higher education institutions, and the rights
andobligationsofeachoftheparties;
o alistofrequireddocumentsandmanneroftheirsubmission,timeneeded
toprocessanapplication,conditionsandproceduresforappealingagainst
adecision;
o aninventoryoftypicalrecognitioncasesand/oracomparativeoverviewof
othereducationsystems(orqualifications)inrelationtothenationalones.
§ Duringtheapplicationproceduretheapplicantsarekeptinformedonthestatus
oftheirapplicationbyprovidingthemwith:
o anacknowledgementofreceiptoftheapplication,andanindicationofthe
deadline;
o informationonanylackingdocumentation(andhowtoobtainit);
o information on delays or issues encountered while dealing with the
application;
o informationonanyupdatestothestatusoftheapplication.
NB:Pleaseillustrateyouranswerbyprovidingaprint-outoftheEnglishdescription
ofthenationalrecognitionsystemonyourwebsite.
PleaseincludethisinformationasanAnnextoyourself-evaluationdocument.
23
Pleaseprovideyouranswertostandard6inthisbox,usingtheguidelinefollowedbyanindicationoftheoverallcomplianceCOMPLIANCESTANDARD51. □Nocompliance
2. □Partialcompliance
3. □Substantialcompliance
4. □Fullcompliance
Standard 6 - (Inter)national Cooperation and Presentation
TheENIC/NARICofficeactivelycooperateswithnationalandinternational
stakeholdersonrecognitionissuesandprovidesinputinthedevelopmentand
disseminationofnewrecognitiontools.Itsupportsandpromotestheactivities
oftheENICandNARICnetworksandmentionsitsmembershipofthenetworksinpublicationsandbrandingactivities.
Guidelines
§ ENIC/NARICofficesarethenationalcentreswhereallexpertiseonrecognitionis
available.Theymakeuseofthisexpertisebycontributingtohighereducation
policydevelopmentsandlegislationinthefieldofrecognitionatregional,
nationalandEuropeanlevel.Theyalsocooperatewithotherinformationcentres,
highereducationinstitutionsandtheirnetworksandotherrelevantactorsinthe
nationalcontext;
§ IntheEU-context,andasfarasNARICshavecompetenceinprofessional
recognitionmatters,theycooperatewiththeNationalCoordinatorandthe
competentauthoritiesfortheprofessionalrecognitionoftheregulated
professions(EUDirectives);
§ ENIC/NARICofficesco-operatewithintheENICandNARICNetworksonthe
disseminationanduseoftheoverarchingframeworkofqualificationsforthe
EuropeanHigherEducationAreaandaccordinglycontributeatnationallevelto
thefurtherdevelopmentanddisseminationofthenationalqualification
frameworks;
§ ENIC/NARICofficesparticipateinpublications,surveys,comparativestudiesand
otherresearchactivitiesundertakenbytheEuropeanCommission,Councilof
Europe,UNESCOandotherinternationalorganizations;
§ ENIC/NARICofficesdevelopcooperationwithrelevantorganisationsincountries
inotherregionsoftheworldworkinginthefieldofrecognitionandpromotethe
activitiesoftheENICandNARICNetworksincountriesinotherregionsofthe
world.
24
§ TheyrefertothemembershipoftheENICandNARICNetworksinallpublications
andcorrespondenceandonwebsitesandmakeappropriateuseofitslogo.
Pleaseprovideyouranswertostandard5inthisbox,usingtheguidelinefollowedbyanindicationoftheoverallcomplianceCOMPLIANCESTANDARD61. □Nocompliance
2. □Partialcompliance
3. □Substantialcompliance
4. □Fullcompliance
25
Annex 3 - SWOT TheformatfortheSWOTanalysis(pleasemindthefootnotes):§ Part1:Compliancewiththestandardsforgoodpractice§ Part2:SWOTanalysisTheformatfortheSWOTanalysis(pleasemindthefootnotes):§ Part1:Compliancewiththestandardsforgoodpractice§ Part2:SWOTanalysisPART1 PART2STANDARD
COMPLIANCE
Priority1(tickbox)
Internalcauses2 Externalcauses3
Actionpoints3
High Lowbeneficial(Strengths)
notbeneficial(Weaknesses)
beneficial(Opportunities)
notbeneficial(Threats)
26
*1 □ □ 2 □ □ 3 □ □ 4 □ □ 5 □ □ 6 □ □ 7 □ □ 8 □ □ 9 □ □ 10 □ □ 11 □ □ 12 □ □ 13 □ □ 14 □ □ 15 □ □ 16 □ □ 17 □ □ 18 □ □ *(1)nocompliance,(2)partialcompliance,(3)substantialcompliance,(4)fullcompliance.
27
1Forfurtheranalysispleasetakeintoconsiderationonlythestandardswithhighpriority.2Pleasebaseonyouranswersgiveninpart1:namethereasonsforyourcomplianceornoncompliancewiththestandardsanddecidewhichofthemarebeneficial,andwhicharenot.3Pleaseindicatehowtoconvertyourweaknessesintostrengths,andthreatsintoopportunities.