NN46, September 2011
Towards a New Global World of Skills Development? TVET's turn to Make its Mark
India’s NVEQF – Sound Policy or Sheer Madness?
By Linda Master, LimeGreen Strategic Education and Communication, Johannesburg
Email: limegreen@telkomsa.net
Keywords: national qualifications frameworks; Indian competency units; unit standards; NVEQF
Summary: An opinion about the proposed Indian national qualifications framework is discussed with reference to the South African NQF.
_____________
When a country with 28 states, 7 territories, many languages, a population way above 1 billion and an exploding new middle class of around 250 million, plans a National Vocational Education Qualifications Framework (NVEQF) a modicum of hyperventilation is excusable. What is so intriguing about qualifications frameworks, like the Indian NVEQF or South Africa’s National Qualifications Framework (NQF), is the eloquence with which it is possible to describe their purpose and the learning pathways through the framework. Reading a nation’s outline of their planned qualifications framework is to become privy not only to the country’s educational, social and economic aspirations but also to their collective sense of self. In many respects, when a nation plans a qualifications framework, it is putting into words a collective wish-list, as it is a sincere and open expression of the aspirations of a state for its population and it economic prosperity. Ironically, it is often those very values that underscore the establishment of a qualifications framework that can ultimately become the site of its undoing. From an education perspective, what lessons can India gain from looking at the South African NQF?
The values that underscore the South African NQF significantly influence its educational values. For example, South Africa’s NQF is deeply influenced by apartheid, and subsequently themes of equal access, social redress and social justice permeate the values embedded in the design of many of the qualifications listed on the NQF. These are noble values, but when used as the core values to drive education, another picture emerges. South Africa’s NQF has placed tremendous value on allowing individuals and communities to determine their pathways toward acquiring a qualification. This is driven by documents called unit standards which describe the outcomes necessary for a learner to acquire a qualification or a part-qualification. Once a learner has successfully completed a number of predefined unit standards, they may be eligible for a qualification. These qualifications sit on the NQF and are deemed equivalent to traditional qualifications. What has been lost in the South African NQF is a clear understanding of what it means to educate adults of all ages. The South African NQF downplays the role of knowledge and emphasises the importance of evaluation according to measurable outcomes. Consequently, there can be little or no uniformity in skills and functioning from people who hold these qualifications.
India, if it sets up a qualifications framework that does not have a healthy respect for knowledge will face similar problems. Focusing on measurable, behaviour-based competency units is no guarantee of common standards across and within state lines. Ultimately, if India does go this route, it may be wise to consider some form of centralised assessment, where all learners participate in an assessment that is managed either by each state or nationally, and benchmarked according to industry best practice, both locally and/or internationally.
The sheer size of India should caution policy makers away from notions of national conformity and commonality. With the majority of the population working in the unorganised or informal sectors, serious questions need to be asked about how India imagines a qualifications framework can transform the working lives of these citizens.
A qualifications framework is not a pedagogy nor an education system, it is an attempt to quantify, qualify and compare qualifications. When a framework begins to dictate to education providers the way that courses have to be structured and assessed, then a new layer of potential problems are added to the system. Education, its delivery and design needs to make intuitive sense to teachers, lecturers, facilitators and learners, and if India’s proposed competency units make little sense to the country’s educators, there is little hope that the process will work.
India’s search for a viable national qualifications framework is no small undertaking. It should not be rushed into, nor should it be considered simply because other countries are moving in that direction. What is never communicated when writing about any qualification frameworks, is just how maddeningly unstructured and uncooperative the world of work and life in general actually are. Qualification frameworks imagine a neat and ordered world, one filled with clear progression pathways, social justice and equivalence; whether it is possible to repackage India in that form is anyone’s guess.
______
Cite article as: Master, L., (2011) ‘India’s NVEQF – Sound Policy or Sheer Madness?’, in NORRAG NEWS, Towards a New Global World of Skills Development? TVET's turn to Make its Mark, No.46, September 2011, pp. 90-91, available: http://www.norrag.org
______
>>Back to full contents of NORRAG NEWS 46.
>>Download the full issue of NORRAG NEWS 46 in pdf.
Network for Policy Research, Review and Advice on Education and Training (NORRAG): a focus and a forum for the analysis of aid in international education, training and development policy
Not registered with NORRAG? Stay connected with education and development issues.