Happy Monday ka.
Late last week, I was very lucky to be invited to attend an EU-ASEAN forum on Consequences of Regional QA and QF for two days.
After some experiences to both QA and QF plus some reading on the 2 topics, I somehow have several questions especially the relationships of the two. This symposium gave me a clearer (not clear cut) answers as well as some more updates about them to learn ka.
Almost two decade ago, I heard western representatives discuss QF and 'learning outcomes'. A decade later, we've taken both up seriously with some impressive progress.
EU has its ESG-- EU Standards and Quality Guidelines for IQA/EQA and EQAA (EQA agencies) to have some broad framework to follow. They also have EU Qualifications Framework (several call it their 'bible') with 8 levels of descriptors for basic to higher education.
With long years of experiences and continuous improvement, EU has been quite strong in its implementation while in ASEAN, we do have AQAF (ASEAN Quality Assurance Framework) and AQRF (ASEAN Qualifications Reference Framework) as reference point/ benchmarking for member countries.
Let me share some keywords when choosing to do QA and QF ka:
- Globalization, mobility of students and labor, mutual recognition
- Life-long learning
- Harmonization not standardization
- Confidence and trust of the society and countries within and beyond the region
- Sense of ownership of faculty, staff, and students
- Collectiveness with Key stakeholders to be engaged in the processes
- Role of institutional leaders
- NOT TO CHANGE OUR OWN QA/QF TO FIT WITH THE REGION'S FRAMEWORK AS WE ALL HAVE OUR OWN CONTEXTS AND NATIONAL AGENDA TO HEED TO.....well! not to take it literally to be far too rigid lae ka!
Looking at the keywords, some may say 'nothing new' but when we think further, we seem to know them, but we may not 'act' or not 'act in an integrated way'!?!?
Hong Kong had a comprehensive study to compare its QF with that of EU, reasoning that 'it's a HEALTH-CHECK OF OUR FRAMEWORK'. It has developed specific guidelines with outcome-focused approach, diversity, and benchmarking against international community in mind.
This is another report that generates many lessons learned for us to study and adjust to our own context dai loei ka.
I like what DSG Bundit said about outcome-based learning......focus on transferrable skills.
The symposium shed more lights to me with a few challenging questions about the Thai QA and QF as well as our use of AQAF and AQRF. The latter two should generate more contribution for Thailand if the big picture becomes clear. Fortunately, our leading universities continue to be committed and move ahead quite progressively in this intellectual and cooperative journey within their respective institutions.
Hopeful me ka!
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น