How can you recognise both success and poor performance?
As it takes time to change, what is the best way for institutions to learn?
- What is the best way to share effective practice?
- How effective is a staged approach to implementing quality assurance?
Austria has focused on providing support to institutions as this helps to safeguard training providers’ autonomy. This support is set within a framework of common principles and a range of strategic and operational tools for the work on quality.
Romania piloted self-assessment quality assurance processes from 2003-2006 in order to introduce new requirements from the 2006-2007 school year.
Since 2003 Hungary has introduced a series of pilot projects to support and promote institutional-level quality assurance in VET. Using European and Hungarian funds, VET providers have been introducing quality assurance systems in line with the four stages of the European Quality Assurance Reference Framework for VET cycle.
The Finish National Board of Education organises an annual seminar of VET providers where those winners of the national “quality awards” are invited to share their best practice.
Support is better than prescription if change is to be embedded and owned.
Setting up, supporting and acknowledging effective practice provides a “win-win” scenario for VET training providers and central administrators.
Quality awards and other formal processes that recognise success can be effective.
Many Member States have used funds from Leonardo da Vinci, Comenius, European Social Funds and other European sources to pilot quality assurance initiatives in VET. See, for example, the Leonardo projects Proqavet, Revimp and Peer Review in European VET and other activities on the Cedefop website.