What is expected from providers?
Is there a need for legislation?
Who will ensure that quality assurance systems are effective?
- How important is legislation in creating a culture of quality assurance?
- How can you ensure that training providers are likely to see the European Quality Assurance Reference Framework for VET expectations as reasonable?
- How clear are training providers about their roles and responsibilities in organising quality assurance systems?
Romanian providers are required to complete an annual self-evaluation. All internal and external self-evaluation processes are co-ordinated by a national agency.
Slovenia introduced new legislation to cover quality assurance at both the provider and national level in 2006. This was followed by legislation in 2008 to make self-evaluation the responsibility of training providers.
In the Netherlands legislation makes it clear that education institutions are primarily responsible for the quality of education and exams, quality assurance, and that they are publicly accountable
In Austria responsibility for quality management is set at three levels: at the school level, at the regional level and at the system level through the Ministry. Close liaison between all parties is crucial.
Legislation is needed to set a framework, for quality assurance. However without other activities and support to training providers, legal systems will not guarantee quality assurance in VET.
Institutions need support and encouragement to demonstrate they have a culture of quality. Without clarity over what is expected from training providers, quality assurance systems are less likely to be in place.
Clear expectations and structures provide transparency within the VET system and allow learners, training providers, inspectors and other stakeholders to understand what quality assurance processes are being used.