紐澳資歷架構在終身學習的應用與啟示

Abstract

本研究以探討紐澳資歷架構在終身學習的應用與啟示為主題，旨在研究紐澳資歷架構的推動脈絡與目的、設計模式與實施情形、成效評估及在終身學習的應用與啟示。主要的研究方法與步驟包括：(1)以質性研究之個案研究為研究方法，以文件分析及訪談法為蒐集資料主要取徑；(2)先進行文獻探討終身學習與NQF理論觀點、ILO研究發現及我國終身學習困境；接續進行紐澳新版NQF文件分析與個案訪談紐澳資歷主管單位、教育機構、學者專家及教育利益相關者；(3)最後進行綜合分析，提出研究發現、研究結論與建議。 研究結論包括：(1) 紐澳資歷架構舊版推動脈絡面對教育制度無法快速回應全球化及知識社會科技變遷需求，新版則配合全球NQF發展趨勢；(2)推動目的新舊版均以創造全國性單一架構、提供多元學習路徑創造終身學習機會及提升全國經濟競爭力為目標；(3)紐澳設計模式始終以「學習成果」為核心理念，強調學習輸出並採能力本位，由業界研發為VET資歷課程依據，新版未忽視學習輸入；(4) 實施機構設置NQF主管單位、能力本位研發單位與品質保證機構；(5) 紐澳實施NQF舊版實施阻力為大學不接受，能力本位研發單位與教育提供者意見相左，能力本位明載過度不易了解，政府內部品質保證與補助機制未配合；(6) 紐澳NQF實施成效有限但可促進不同教育部門流動與先前學習的認可，提供更多學習路徑，創造教育市場，提供大學多功能發展的平台，教育與勞力市場關係則有待加強；(7) 未來政策走向實施強制定期品質保證評鑑與加強資歷的教學與評量；(8) 紐澳NQF在終身學習的應用為創造級數與資歷描述語之學習成果內涵，作為VET與高等教育共同語言，提供先前學習認可依據，創造資歷具有貨幣價值；(9)紐澳NQF在終身學習的啟示為NQF真正在價值在於提供終身學習機會與提升紐澳人民的職場能力，NQF之外的終身學習價值須依學習成果相同的評量標準，方具同等價值。 研究建議包括：(1)對紐澳政府建議：定期實施NQF成效評估並訂定評鑑指標、國際交流分享檢討、支援教育提供者組成合作夥伴學習網絡共同研發如何撰寫界定資歷之學習成果、教學課程與評量、反思NQF學習成果導向機制與傳統教學目的差異性、再研究NQF相似性原則合理性、進行資歷與職場關係研究、進行實地評鑑教育提供者之品質保證、系統化研究先前學習認可的指南範例、組成終身學習團隊研究非正規與非正式學習如何界定為NQF之學習成果內涵、研議如何建立資歷同等價值之信任區；(2)對我國政府之建議：紐澳值得建議之處為有NQF比沒有NQF好、NQF設計模式可參考紐澳模式、近程規劃先協調後設置NQF主管單位、中程規劃立法設置品質保證管理機構、長期規劃研發資歷轉化為課程教學與評量；(3)對區域架構之建議值得推行；(4)後續研究建議：反思國內目的與評估現行機制缺失、研商創造全國性單一架構可行性、調查國內對NQF的認識程度、邀集產業、專業學會與大專院校協商共同研發VET資歷、課程及先前學習認可評量之可行性及進行紐澳以外其他國家NQF典範學習實徵研究

The research topic is related to study on AQF and NZQF with its application and inspiration on lifelong learning. There are four topics in my research, including study on the purposes of setting up AQF/NZQF and its background, how to design the AQF /NZQFin order to meet these aims or purposes, what are the implementation organisations, what are the help and barriers of implementation, what are the impacts or results of AQF /NZQF implementation with future direction, how to apply AQF/NZQF in promoting lifelong learning. The research method undertakes document analysis, literature review and interview. Firstly the literature review will include the theories of lifelong learning and National Qualifications Framework ( referred to as NQF), ILO research finding , European Qualifications Framework and APEC international framework and Taiwan current lifelong learning status, followed by document analysis of new reform of NZQF and AQF as well as semi-structured interview. The interviewees will include AQFC and NZQA, universities, VET providers and educational stakeholders. The research conclusions are in the following. (1) NZQF and AQF in the early stage faced them problem that the education system was unable to respond quickly to the demand of globalization, knowledge society and new technology challenge. The new version of NZQF and AQF in the 21century is to meet with global trend of NQF development. (2) The purpose of these two countries was to create a single unified framework in order to provide multi learning pathways for lifelong learning and enhance the national economic competitiveness. (3)The design pattern of AQF and NZQA is learning outcome-led and emphasizes on learning output as well as competence-based approach. The competence-based units are developed by the industry and are the basis of vocational education and training programs. The new version of AQF and NZQF does not ignore the importance of learning input. (4)The implementation agencies are NQF agencies, industry bodies for developing competence units and quality assurance authorities. (5)The implementation barriers are that universities do not accept NQF, industry bodies have conflicts with educational providers, and government quality assurance and funding agencies do not match the NQF principles. (6)The successful evidence of NQF implementation in these countries was limited, but NQF has impact on VET along with facilitating the mobility between different education and training sectors and recognition of prior learning. It also provides more learning pathways for students, and creates educational market. There are more opportunities for universities to develop multi-functions programs. However, the relationships between education and workplace are required to make more effort. (7)The future policy directions will be implementing mandatory quality assurance evaluation for educational providers and qualifications along with strengthening qualifications teaching and assessment. (8) The application of AQF and NZQF for lifelong learning is to create learning outcome-led level and qualifications descriptors as the common language for VET and Higher Education, which are used for basis of prior learning recognition and create the qualifications as currency value. (9)The inspiration of AQF and NZQF for lifelong learning is that the real value of NQFs lies in providing the lifelong learning opportunities and enhancing the workforce performance. The learning equivalence and value beyond of AQF and NZQF is required to meet the same learning outcome standards. The research suggestions are as follows: 1. Suggestions for the governments of New Zealand and Australia include (1) implementing regular NQF impact review and setting up the review or assessment indicators; (2) exchanging and sharing international experience of NQF implementation; (3) supporting educational providers’ network for developing learning outcome, teaching course and assessment of qualifications; (4) reflecting the differences between learning outcome and learning input; (5) rethinking the logical similarity principle of NQF; (6) conducting the relationship between qualifications and workforce; (7) systematically studying on the prior learning recognition based on NQF learning outcome; (8) setting up research group to develop the NQF learning outcome for non-formal and informal learning; (9) Doing research on how to build the trust zone for different qualifications between various sectors. 2. Suggestions for Taiwan’s government. (1) Having a NQF is better than having not. (2) The design pattern can take AQF and NZQF as a policy learning. (3) In the short-term, to negotiate between different government agencies goes firstly, followed by setting up agency in charge of NQF development and planning. (4) In the middle term, to legislate for quality assurance regulations and authority of NQF qualifications. (5) In the long term, planning to transform the learning outcome into teaching courses and assessment systematically. 3. Suggestion for international regional qualifications framework (1) It is worthwhile to promote international regional qualifications framework such as EQF and Asian Pacific Qualifications framework. 4. Suggestions for follow-up research (1) Doing research on Taiwan needs for NQF; (2) Doing study on the feasibility of creating one single unified qualifications framework; (3) Doing survey on the knowing of NQF for the public, including educational stakeholders; (4) Taking research on the feasibility of developing competence-based qualifications between industry, VET providers and recognition of prior learning based on the learning outcome; (5) Studying on other good model of NQFs in the world in addition to AQF and NZQF.