Indicator 1. Relevance of quality assurance systems for VET providers

a) Share of providers applying internal quality assurance systems defined by law/at  own initiative;
b) Share of accredited VET providers.

Definition

Relevance of quality assurance systems for VET providers:
a) Percentage of VET providers showing evidence of applying the EQAVET principles within a defined quality assurance system, where the number of registered VET providers =100%;
b) Percentage of VET providers who are accredited, where the number of registered VET providers = 100%.

Key Information

The following Questions & Answers may be useful in interpreting this indicator and in supporting its implementation.

Recommended Use

What is the policy rationale for Indicator 1 and what is it useful for?

The purpose of the policy is to promote a quality improvement culture at VET provider level, to increase the transparency of quality of training and to improve mutual trust on training provision.

Usefulness of Indicator 1

Indicator 1 is a context/input indicator which

  • Assists in promoting a quality improvement culture at VET-provider level, in increasing the transparency of quality of training and in improving mutual trust in training provision;
  • May be used in the planning, implementation, evaluation and review phases of the quality cycle.

Related Indicators

Which other EQAVET indicators may be used to improve understanding or provide additional information?

All ten EQAVET Indicators

Technical and contextual caveats

Which specific issues should be considered in order to avoid misapplication and/or misinterpretation of this indicator?

  • Existence of multiple supervising authorities;
  • Use of different quality assurance principles, e.g. EQAVET, ISO 9001, EFQM;
  • Quality assurance (QA) systems are differently accredited in Member States, e.g. by governmental bodies/agencies, public notified bodies or private sector;
  • Possible need to measure the baseline conditions (the first time when you measure an indicator);
  • Databases of VET providers, and inspection or systems are required to enable judgements to be made on providers’ internal QA systems, i.e. VET providers may be required by awarding bodies to follow certain QA standards, while some of them, publicly funded, are also required to report to funding agencies;
  • There may be issues around whether these data are a) publicly available and therefore open to scrutiny by authorities administering EQAVET and b) if they are capable of being aggregated in a reliable way ;
  • If relevant, consider distinguishing between QA systems defined by law/regulated at national and at provider level, i.e. quality assurance may be undertaken by an external agency and external process, or internal, that is, undertaken through a VET institution’s own internal Quality Management System  involving internal processes and own staff;
  • How the terms ‘registered’ and ‘accredited’ are used in your context may affect the use of this indicator;

Data sources from different databases would need a common identifier to link data.

Technical Notes

Components: Which data elements are needed to generate this indicator?

Indicator 1a)
Numerator
: Number of VET providers showing evidence of applying the EQAVET principles within a defined quality assurance system.
Denominator: Total number of registered VET providers.

Indicator 1b)
Numerator
: Number of accredited VET providers.
Denominator: Total number of registered VET providers.

 

Formula: Which mathematical formula may be used for computing the indicator value?

Indicator 1a)
The number of VET providers showing evidence of applying EQAVET principles divided by the total number of registered providers X 100;

Indicator 1b)
The number of accredited VET providers divided by the number of registered VET providers X 100.

 

Reported Subgroups: Which subgroups are commonly reported for this indicator?
Consider relevant subgroups at national, regional and local level, and IVET and CVET providers, e.g.

IVET and CVET providers formally registered by Ministry (e.g. Education, Economy, Labour), Chambers, relevant authorities ( e.g. regional. authorities);
IVET and CVET providers accredited by a public notified body or providers under the regulation of educational laws.

 

Data requirements: What type of data may be useful to gather on this indicator?

Relevance of quality assurance systems for VET providers:
a) Universe of registered VET providers:
- VET providers formally registered by Ministry (e.g. Education, Economy, Labour), Chambers, relevant authorities (e.g. regional authorities);

b) Accredited VET providers:
- VET providers under the regulation of educational laws, e.g. schools, colleges;
- VET providers in the education/training market who are accredited by a public notified body.

NOTE: for further information on quality assurance for VET providers in Estonia, Hungary, Ireland, Slovenia and the United Kingdom, please click here

© European Quality Assurance in Vocational Education and Training

This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This Website reflects only the views of EQAVET and the Commission cannot be help responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein

Designed and developed by Arekibo