14 The MoEC decree 732013 is explicit on the requirements for study programs to be eligible to offer RPL
assessment, • acquire accreditation status at least B by BAN-PT or equivalent international accreditation
agencies for at least 2 two consecutive years, and maintained the rating when submitting the proposal;
• graduates are employed or self employed, as demonstrated by the most recent tracer studies conducted;
• recommended by the relevant professional associations; and • passed the portfolio test conducted by independent panel of experts on behalf of the MoRTHE.
2.5 Defining learning outcomes
The Presidential Decree on the IQF requires all study programs, as well as courses and skill training offerings, to adjust their learning outcomes with reference to the IQF. At the beginning of this study,
descriptors in 75 study programs in 29 fields professions, within the 8 priority sectors
8
, have been drafted, as presented in Appendix-1. At the end of 2014, an additional 25 descriptors were developed.
The Presidential Decree revives the concept of competency standards in courses and training. Courses and training that previously used competency standards emphasizing education achievement need to
adjust their learning outcomes to skills formation, and make this information available for the public. In order to improve transparency, the qualifications and competencies of a graduate should be stated in a
document, termed as Diploma Supplement Surat Keterangan Pendamping Ijasah, as required by MoEC Regulation 812014. Although the reputation of the issuing institution is currently crucial in appreciating
the graduate’s competencies, the use of the Diploma Supplement provides additional information to improve the stakeholders’ trust and confidence of graduate outcomes.
8
Nursing, accounting, tourism, engineering, dental practitioners, medical practitioners, surveying, and architecture
15
Chapter 3 International experiences
3.1 Governance
9
3.1.1 National qualifications authorities
The majority of countries that have implemented a NQF have created a single qualifications authority to design andor implement and manage their NQF. However, these authorities vary substantially,
especially in their terms of reference, operations, size and capacity [Allais 2010]. In essence the variance is due to:
• nature, scope and purpose of the NQF; • characteristics of the qualifications system, including the quality assurance arrangements in
place or desired; • degree and scope of desired stakeholder engagement; and
• social and political characteristics of the country. Generally, the variances are as a result of whether the authority has a quality assurance role or not
within the qualifications system. Some countries may have established multiple agencies to manage the quality assurance of various sub sectors e.g. Australia, however each country has established only one
single agency to manage the NQF and manage or coordinate the implementation of its NQF across all education and training sectors within the scope of its NQF.
The underpinning purpose of an NQF can affect the governance arrangements of the responsible agency within a country. A NQF is a set of nationally agreed standards, developed by competent authorities,
which recognize learning outcomes and competences for all forms of learning [UNESCO 2012]. Raffe distinguishes between three types of qualifications frameworks [Raffe 2009],
• communication frameworks; • reforming frameworks; and
• transformational frameworks.
A communications framework is defined as one that takes the existing structures of the education and training system and aims to make it transparent and easier to understand. A reforming framework is one
which takes the existing structures of the education and training system and aims to improve it. The transformational framework on the other hand looks towards the future for the education and training
system and aims to develop structures to achieve the proposed change.
NQFs can vary in terms of whether they are tight or loose frameworks [Tuck 2007]. Tuck states that tight NQFs are generally based on legislation or regulation with which accreditation of qualifications are to
comply. As such, there are often common rules and procedures for the development and approval of qualifications for all education and training sectors. Loose frameworks, on the other hand, tend to be
based on general principles and are more guidance rather than requirements to comply with [Tuck 2007:22].
Tuck [2007] indicates that tight frameworks are more appropriate for a regulatory environment and a loose framework more appropriate when the framework has more of a communicative focus. Tuck’s
9
Full report prepared by Ms Andrea Bateman on international experiences of governance arrangements is submitted separately.
