Duration

24 months

General approach/description of the project

RECOMFOR is a network bringing together competent institutions from 11 countries, more specifically concerned with the sector of trade.  RECOMFOR builds on the results of the COMINTER project, which was completed in September 2007. During the COMINTER project, partners, in cooperation with sectoral organisations, produced a common qualification profile for the profession of import-export assistant. This profile is unit-based and its application rules are flexible to enable adaptation to country-specific contexts and requirements. This profile as well as the tools developed are the basis of the mobility network created through RECOMFOR.

One of the findings of the COMINTER project was that, even if there is a strong potential for training centres to enhance the mobility of their learners, obstacles still remain. These obstacles are mainly related to the lack of guaranteed work placement abroad and insufficient mutual recognition between the different competent institutions. Establishing a permanent network to help overcome these obstacles is the main objective of RECOMFOR.

RECOMFOR thus created a platform for training centres and companies that see mobility as an integrated part of training pathways. The platform is designed to help partners to develop common quality criteria and mutual trust.

The following principles ensure the sustainability of mobility in this context:

• Clear quality criteria will be set up to guarantee mobility;

• The role and responsibility of companies taking on foreign trainees will be described; and

• The operating procedures as well as the role of the competent institutions will be defined and simplified.

Partners in RECOMFOR involve 11 different countries and 51 training centres. The cooperation is based on a common job profile « import-export commercial assistant » (EQF level 4/5) and concerns 1,300 learners. However in the long term, the partnership aimed at involving new partners, from different countries and possibly concerning different qualifications. This will enable to expand the work placement possibilities.

Target group

This project is focused on young people in initial training with specific reference to the BTS Commercial (trade) which is equivalent to EQF level 3 and 4. As the project develops, there is scope to explore the mobility of workers in continuous training.

Dissemination

Transfer And Accumulation

Approach to assessment

Each country has a different assessment process.
Hosting assessments can be comparable (in terms of assessment method, timing of assessment, profiles of assessors), or they can be different but still considered reliable (e.g. FR and NL have very different assessment approaches but the quality assurance is in place and hence the assessment can be considered as reliable). In both cases there is no problem to recognise assessed learning  outcomes.
A problem can arise in countries where assessments are not at all comparable. In Italy for instance learners do not have to carry out certain tasks in front of the assessors, but instead they discuss it with a jury. In such cases, a specific assessment will have to be defined in the learning agreement.

The main elements covered in the learning agreement are:

• What are the assessment criteria?

• How the learning outcomes will be assessed?

• When will assessment take place?

• Who will assess?

• Where will the assessment take place?

For each learning agreement, all these questions have to be defined.  

Validation and recognition of learning outcomes

Each partner will decide the rules and procedures for transfer and recognition according to national context.

Units of learning outcomes

Method and approach

The approach chosen by the project was to develop common reference units.

On the basis of the reference units, the next step was to design national units or to link national units with reference units. The project established certain rules for transferring common reference units into national units: several reference units may be equivalent to one unit in some countries (e.g. France where units tend to be rather large) whilst one unit may be broken down into two units in other systems.  The important thing being to avoid allocating bits of units into different units. The rules are therefore:

• Two (or more) reference units can make one national unit;

• Learning outcomes from one reference unit can be spread out into several national units;

• Learning outcomes from one reference unit cannot be spread out into several national units if this leads to building disparate units.

All partner countries could use all reference units or some of them. All the countries in the partnership are currently using units within their national qualifications systems.

ECVET Points

Methods to allocate points

Credit points have been allocated to common reference units, along the following principles:

• Units can be adapted in each national context and thus cannot be found under exactly the same form in each national qualification – consequently some adaptation is likely to be necessary;

• To maintain the coherence of the common work, the transcription of the number of points allocated at a national level must not lead to a variation higher than 10% in comparison with the number of points defined for the common reference unit. This constitutes a lower and upper limit for the value of a unit;

• The relative value of the unit is expressed in form of a percentage with regard to the total number of units defined in common. The qualification (all the units) represent 100% - the proportions - relative weight of units - can then be transferred to any of the partner systems.

Points are useful to indicate the relative weight of each unit, i.e. Unit A is more important than Unit B. Then the relative weight is applied to the national context.  If unit A is very important for a certain job profile, it should be important for qualifications in all the partner countries – otherwise there is a risk that the qualifications do not prepare for the same occupation.

The methodology for the allocation of points was a three month process: to determine if a unit is fundamental, or very basic, professionals were consulted to establish the importance of each unit compared to the job requirement. Training providers were also involved and asked to analyse the learning outcomes of each unit in terms of the complexity from the learning process point of view (e.g. unit X requires a lot of time, or, it is very difficult). The groups sometimes had different views (one unit could represent 20 points for professionals, and 18 for training centres) but overall the feedback from professionals and training centres was broadly the same (except 2% difference on one unit). differences were negligible. As a result of this consultation, the same weight was finally attributed to each unit, because each of them was considered equally important.
The relative value of the unit is expressed in percentage rather than points.

It is then up to the countries/systems using ECVET points to apply these proportions according to their national rules.  When translated into national context, variations were limited to 10%.

Lessons learnt

There is no mathematical way of allocating points. Projects need to consult all stakeholders and engage in a negotiation process. It is difficult to say if the result is a neutral representation of the importance of the units. In ECTS, points represent the volume of workload in terms of time, which is maybe considered as a more neutral representation. As this is not possible with ECVET, the only solution is to work towards a common agreement and the consensus of all stakeholders, although they look at units from a different point of view.

How ECVET points will be used in the partnership
 
The allocation of points will also depend on competent institutions at national level: designing/ award of points/ allocation of points. In Austria for instance, training centres are empowered to allocate ECVET points to qualifications. In France it will be the central authority. Different scenarios will depend on the country.

Consolidation of partnerships in formal agreements

Regarding the establishment of the Memorandum of Understanding, the process took place in several phases:

• Development of an umbrella MoU or general MoU for the Recomfor Network

• Additional MoU for some countries

• Model of learning agreement common for all partners (that will be made specific for each student at the level of the training centre)

The general MoU for RECOMFOR state that partners:

• accept each other's status as competent institutions;

• accept each other's quality assurance, assessment, validation and recognition criteria and procedures as satisfactory for the purposes of credit transfer;

• agree on the conditions for the operation of the partnership, such as objectives, duration and arrangements for review of the MoU;

• agree on the comparability of qualifications concerned for the purposes of credit transfer, using the reference levels established by EQF;

• identify other actors and competent institutions that may be involved in the process concerned and their functions;

• issuing of learners’ personal transcript, etc.

The learning agreement will contain:

• home and host institutions: roles and responsibilities;

• duration for mobility;

• learning outcomes ;

• how learning outcomes will be assessed and transferred.

The template used will be the adaptation of users guide’ example.

Partnership

Project promoter:
CGI, Confédération française du commerce interrentreprises, France

Partners:
CIEP-MEN, Centre International d’Etudes Pédagogiques, Ministère de l’Education nationale, France
CEF, Conseil de l’Education et de la Formation, Belgium
DGEPAiE, Generalitat de Catalunya Departament d’Educació Direcció General d’Ensenyaments Professionals, Artístics i Especialitzats, Spain
AGEFA PME, Association de gestion des formations en alternance pour les PME, France
OEEK, The Organisation for Vocational Education and Training, Greece
USP Venezia, Ufficio Scolastico Provinciale Di Venezia, Italy
CPV, Fondation Giacomo Rumor, Veneto Productivity Center, Italy
KCHandel, Kenniscentrum Handel, The Netherlands
IVS, International Vocational Studies Aliiance, The Netherlands
NVG, Nederlands Verbond van de Groothandel, The Netherlands
CECOA, Centro de Formação Profissional para o Comércio e Afins, Portugal
CCP, Confederação do Comércio e Serviços de Portugal
NCTVETD, National Centre for Technical and Vocational Education and Training Development, Romania
CCIB, Bucharest Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Romania
CPI, Center RS za poklicno izobraževanje, Slovenia
CPU, Gospodarska zbornica slovenije, Center za Poslovno Usposabljanje, Slovenia
CNCCEF, National Comity of French Foreing Trade Advisors, France
IUFFP, Instituto Universitario federale per la formazione professionale, Switzerland

Lead organisation contact details

Mr Richard Maniak: richard.maniak@education.gouv.fr

Website

Final Report
 

---

Consult article on the projects results in the 6th issue of the ECVET Magazine
 

---

Example of a unit of learning outcomes as developed by the project
 

---

Professional profile: international trade assistant
 

---

See the Recomfor quality charters for training centres and entreprises in the Toolbox
 

---

Consult the RECOMFOR presentation on their approach to testing ECVET as made during the 4th pilot projects seminar in February 2010
 

---

Consult the description of the RECOMFOR project in the first issue of the ECVET Bulletin, p.17
 

---