2 the commencement of the ASEAN Economic Community in 2015.ASEAN is also linked to the Asia–Pacific
region through cross membership of Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation APEC. In responding to its global commitments, Indonesia joined a number of international conventions in
sectors including trade, economics, environment, and education. To name a few: the General Agreement on Trade in Services in1994, the World Trade Organization in1995, the ASEAN Free Trade
Area in 1992, the Regional Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Diplomas and Degrees in Higher Education in Asia and the Pacific in1983. This supports Indonesian workforce mobility through four
modes of supply:
• Cross-border supply: the possibility for non-resident service suppliers to supply services cross- border into the member’s territory;
• Consumption abroad: the freedom for the member’s residents to purchase services in the territory of another member;
• Commercial presence: the opportunities for foreign service suppliers to establish, operate or expand a commercial presence in the member’s territory, such as a branch, an agency, or a
wholly owned subsidiary; • Presence of natural persons: the possibilities offered for the entry and temporary stay in the
member’s territory of foreign individuals in order to supply a service.
1.2 National Qualifications Framework
The AQRF is a common reference framework designed as a translation device to enable the comparison of qualifications across ASEAN member countries
. As National Qualifications Framework NQF becomes an essential requirement in implementing the AEC, each ASEAN member country is required to establish
its own NQF and reference it to the AQRF. The following box summarizes some of the main rationales offered for the development of NQFs which are explored in more depth in subsequent chapters.
While economic development is an indisputable stimulus, as illustrated in the ASEAN case, the development of qualifications framework is also motivated by a nation’s imperative to reform its
education system. Indeed one of the stated aims of the European Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning, commonly shortened to the European Qualifications Framework EQF, is the promotion of
lifelong learning. In its initial design phase, the intention was for the EQF to be a translation device to understand individual competencies and qualifications across the member countries. In summary, the
practical reasons for developing a NQF are presented in the box.
NQFs are now globally recognized as the foundation of the educational strategies needed to build nations’ skilled workforces to support their economic development and growth. The best estimate is
that the majority of countries – spanning all continents – has developed or is developing a national qualifications framework. Furthermore with the increasing global mobility of workers, the need for a
national mechanism against which skills and qualifications gained elsewhere can be recognized is becoming an imperative. NQFs are used for the latter purpose in the absence of a regionally agreed
referencing tool such as the AQRF or the EQF.
In reality, it is difficult to separate the driver of education system reform from the need for countries to educate the populace for employment. For example, the impetus for the revision of Australia’s first
qualifications framework was to facilitate the emergence of Australia’s vocational education and training
3 sector
1
. However, the need for a structured, vocationally-oriented training sector to expand the already strong trades-training system and to sit alongside higher education and school education sectors was
strongly grounded in the country’s economic reform programs.
Overview of the main rationales for National Qualifications Frameworks
Worker mobility: Economic integration facilitates the flow of goods and services, including workers, between participating countries. Since education and training systems are widely varied among the
member countries, an agreed standard is needed to understand and regulate workers’ qualification. By implementing such standards, workers would be eligible to take job opportunities
within the region without having to take additional procedures to re-qualify their competencies.
Student mobility: Without a common understanding of each other’s qualifications, student mobility between countries will be difficult to implement. This is particularly true when member countries
do not have a similar education and training system and require the transparency that a qualifications framework can provide.
Relevance: When establishing program learning outcomes, stakeholders, particularly employers and users, must be involved. Such involvement would improve the relevance of the education and
training to the world of work.
Lifelong learning: Economic growth brings new prosperity that drives adult employees, who might have missed the opportunity to properly attend schooling, to reenter the education and training
system. Some of their work experiences could be recognized, exempting them from taking some courses. Without a qualifications framework that provides for qualifications linkages and promotes
recognition of prior learning, such an activity could be tedious, cumbersome, and eventually discourage adults from continuing the learning. In the world of work, experiences could also be
used to acquire formal recognition that directly benefits employees’ careers.
Accountability of providers: Learning outcomes at program level are required to be well articulated giving sufficient information to the prospective students and parents. This accountability is
required as part of good university governance.
1.3 The Analytical and Capacity Development Partnership ACDP 024 study
