DIGITAL TOOLS FOR MATCHING QUALIFICATIONS TO THE LEVELS OF THE NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORK
PDF

Keywords

qualification
National Framework of Qualifications
European Framework of Qualifications
comparison of learning outcomes
Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)
AHP Application Programming Interface

How to Cite

[1]
V. Kovtunets, S. Londar, S. . Melnyk, and O. Kovtunets, “DIGITAL TOOLS FOR MATCHING QUALIFICATIONS TO THE LEVELS OF THE NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORK”, ITLT, vol. 100, no. 2, pp. 16–27, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.33407/itlt.v100i2.5313.

Abstract

Mutual compatibility of different national qualifications frameworks (NQFs) based on their compatibility with the European Qualifications Framework (or another international one) is crucially important for the effective recognition of qualifications between states. In turn, it depends on the quality of “filling” NQF levels with qualifications. Right comparing professional (occupational) qualifications with  NQF level is a non-trivial problem for standard developers. The quality of any national system of qualifications depends on the comparability of qualifications with the level of the NQF so the comparison process should be strongly argued to secure the comparability. For qualification standard developers (especially for occupational standard developers) there were no strictly justified recommendations on how to compare qualification with the NQF level. Th. Saaty’s Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is developed to resolve the problem of evidence-based comparing educational or professional (occupational) qualifications with the level of the National Qualification Framework (NQF). Research results give standard developers software tools based on a strong mathematical background to determine NQF level for developed standards. It is shown that Th. Saaty’s Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is close to optimal for solving the problem of qualifications comparing and therefore looks like the best option for such methods. However, AHP demands non-trivial qualifications in mathematics and computing. The key problem resolved by this research is simplifying procedures to ensure effective access to the tool for qualification standard developers with minimal qualification in mathematics and computing. It is proven that each problem of qualification comparison with NQF level may be reduced to three options of decision. At the lower level of the decision-making process, there are 3-4 descriptors of qualification. Therefore, a user should be capable of forming at most four matrices of judgments and computing the main eigenvectors with some level of accuracy. The maximal dimension of matrices is four (for example it's true for the Ukrainian case). But for some national qualification frameworks that use only three descriptors maximal dimension of matrices equals three. Therefore, some simple approximation methods for eigenvector computing may be applied using only minimal means of Microsoft Excel or analogous applications. For the most general case of four NQF descriptors, Microsoft Excel macro is developed to secure achieving any level of accuracy. Corresponding API is developed by PHP programming language. Both Excel and API are accessible for users at the website of the Institute of Educational Analytics in Kyiv. The novelty of the article is that for the first time in national and international practice, it proposes an alternative/supplementary algorithmic method for determining the level of certain full and/or partial professional qualifications by the National Qualifications Framework, thus creating prerequisites for further automation of the activities of professional standards developers.

PDF

References

National Qualifications Agency. Ukraine. (2021, Sept. 21). Decision on Approval Methodical recommendations for determining the level of professional qualifications according to the National Qualifications Framework.. [Online]. Available: https://drive.google.com/file/d/16zwvcLVUx3TBlZxbTF75Heiy8vodSKlY/view?fbclid=IwAR3FfSH50s3MY6D7MO8bPpUZmsCfRY_IBqWW793dLReX1Walj6f84uxA8CU (in Ukrainian)

G. Hanf. Methodological recommendations for comparing qualifications with the National Qualifications Framework of Ukraine: draft dated 05.03.2015 [Online]. Available: https://ipq.org.ua/upload/files/files/03_Novyny/ (in Ukrainian)

B.Karseth and T.D. Solbrekke, Qualifications Frameworks: the avenue towards the convergence of European higher education? European Journal on Education, v. 45, Issue 4, p. 529-623, 2010, doi:10.1111/j.1465-3435.2010.01449.x. (in English)

V. V. Osadchyi, V. S. Yeremieiev, S. V. Sharov, K. P. Osadcha, and S. L. Koniukhov, Comparison of national qualifications frameworks by means of web-oriented intelligent information system”, ITLT, vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 121–136, Dec. 2016. (in Ukrainian)

J. Mattar, C.C.Santo and L.M. Cuque, Analysis and Comparison of International Digital Competence Frameworks for Education. Educ. Sci. 12(12), 932, p.1-24, 2022, doi:10.3390/educsci12120932. (in English)

Th. Saaty, Mathematical principles of Decision Making, RSW Publications, 2010. (in English)

Th. Saaty, Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback: The Analytic Network Process, RWS Publications,1996. (in English)

Al Qubaisi, A., Badri, M., Mohaidat, J., Al Dhaheri, H., Yang, G., Al Rashedi, A. and K. Greer, An analytic hierarchy process for school quality and inspection: Model development and application, International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 30 No. 3, 2016. pp. 437-459, doi:10.1108/IJEM-09-2014-0123. (in English)

F.A. Taylor, A.F. Ketcham, and D. Hoffman, Personnel evaluation with AHP, Management Decision, Vol. 36 No. 10, pp. 679-685, 1998. doi:10.1108/00251749810245336. (in English)

L. Saaty, K. Peniwati and J. S. Shang.”The analytic hierarchy process and human resource allocation: Half the story”, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, vol. 46, 7–8, pp. 1041-1053, October 2007. (in English)

Cabinet of Ministries of Ukraine. (2011, November, 23). Res. 1341, On approval of National Qualification Framework. [Online]. Available: https://www.kmu.gov.ua/npas/244824068. (in Ukrainian)

Council of the European Union, (2017, May, 22), Council recommendation of 22 May 2017 on the European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning and repealing the recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on the establishment of the European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning. [Online]. Available: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32017H0615(01). (in English)

National Qualifications Frameworks (NQFs), CEDEFOP, cedefop.europa.eu. [Online]. Available: https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/projects/national-qualifications-framework-nqf.

International Standard Classification of Education ISCED 2011. [Online]. Available https://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/international-standard-classification-of-education-isced-2011-en.pdf. (in English)

V. Kovtunets and S. Melnyk, “Methodology of comparison of professional qualifications with the National Framework of Qualifications”, in Presented at International Scientific and Practical Conference "Education of Ukraine in the conditions of marital state: management, digitalization, European integration aspects". October 25, 2022, Kyiv, Ukraine, Proc., p. 134-136. [Online]. Available: https://iea.gov.ua/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/book-of-abstracts_ssi-iea_2022.pdf. (in Ukrainian)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2024 Volodymyr Kovtunets, Sergiy Londar, Serhii Melnyk, Oles Kovtunets

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.