Page 2 of 3
3. Canada
PLAR has a history of over 20 years in Canada. Quebec was the first to implement PLAR policies in community colleges across the province. Then, British Columbia, Ontario, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland began to follow suit. British Columbia has developed an excellent PLAR system which serves as a model for other provinces. One part of this system is the British Columbia Council on Admissions and Transfer (BCCAT). BCCAT is funded by the provincial government, but is operated semi-independently. Members of the Council include some well-known universities, such as Thompson Rivers University. Members arrange for an annual meeting to coordinate activities and to share experiences. The system commissioned universities to produce a credit transfer guide for British Columbia. [11]As education is managed at the provincial level in Canada, the federal government was initially reluctant to get involved with PLAR. [11]However, the federal government oversees employment insurance and immigration, and showed interest after it realized PLAR's potential for workforce training. Currently at the federal level, the Canadian Labour Force Development Board and Human Resources and Skills Development Canada are actively promoting PLAR and support PLAR research projects and publications.
4. Norway
Since the 1950's, adults in Norway have been allowed by law to sit for examinations based on practical work experience upon completion of an apprenticeship. In 1999, a national system was established to record and identify informal learning at the workplace and in the education field. [12]
5. Britain
Britain has close ties to the United States, and expands upon research conducted by American scholars. British scholars started to study prior experiential learning assessment around 1980. The government actively promotes PLAR development, and has established the Credit Accumulation and Transfer System (CATS) and National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) system. Before 1994, Britain’s recognition of prior learning achievement mainly applied to a single subject or study activity, and was a way for non-traditional students to enter HEIs. After 1994, the recognition of prior learning experience and corresponding credit conferment has become part of the process of getting a degree or diploma. In 2004, the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education issued "Guidelines on the Accreditation of Prior Learning". Though Scotland is a part of Britain, it has developed its own PLAR policies and practices. [13] [14]
6. Australia
Australia developed PLAR practices extensively in the late 1980's and early 1990's. In December 1993, the Australian Government Publishing Service published "Guidelines for Credit Transfer and Recognition of Prior Learning", requiring universities to develop and publish policies for prior learning recognition. In 1995, heads of various national departments convened and created the Australian Recognition Framework. In 2000, the learning achievement recognition system was formally implemented nationwide. Aboriginal students and those participating in national training reform projects began to benefit from universities' adoption of PLAR. Despite high enthusiasm early on, PLAR had little long-term effect on disadvantaged students, perhaps because PLAR is mainly used by private education providers to attract paying students. Traditional academic education is still predominant, and credits are only recognized for certain practical courses. In June 2004, the Australian Qualifications Framework Advisory Board（AQFAB）published "National Principles and Operational Guidelines for Recognition of Prior Learning". In May 2009, the government adopted the AQF's national guidelines on credit transfer and PLAR.[15]Just as in Canada, the federal government of Australia is also responsible for vocational education and training. Despite support from the federal government, application of PLAR remains limited in Australia.[16]
7. South Africa
PLAR was originally part of an effort to change the social and economic conditions of South Africa after the abolishment of apartheid. In 2002, the South African Qualification Authority (SAQA) released a policy document relating PLAR to the national framework of qualification recognition. This document set standards regarding assessment quality, system policy and environment, learner support, training and registration of appraisers and other key personnel, assessment methods and procedures, quality management systems, PLAR cost, etc. In 2003, SAQA released an executive guide to PLAR as a follow-on document. [17]
8. South Korea
South Korea's credit bank system was proposed by the Presidential Commission on Education Reform on January 13, 1997, approved by the South Korean government and officially rolled out in March 1998. As an open education system, the credit bank recognizes various kinds of learning experiences inside and outside schools. The system is mainly administered by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MOEST), National Institute for Lifelong Education (NILE) and educational offices in each province. Recently, the system has focused on providing innovative, diversified and maximized educational opportunities for learners seeking education and training after finishing secondary school. In 1999, South Korea passed the Law on Lifelong Education. This law was originally submitted to parliament as the Law on Lifelong Learning on November 26, 1998. During the course of deliberation, members of parliament felt that the articles all related to education and approved the legislation as the "Law on Lifelong Education". As specified in Article 28, Section 2 of the law, South Korea recognizes the credits and schooling for the following persons in accordance with pertinent legal regulations: (1) Persons who have finished lifelong learning subjects as specified by law; (2) Persons who have completed compulsory subjects in schools of all levels or lifelong education institutions; (3) Persons who have received education at industrial entities and obtained qualification recognition at their workplace; (4) Persons who have obtained qualification recognition by passing proficiency tests held by the state, local autonomous organizations, schools of all levels or industrial entities; (5) Persons who have been professionally trained in accordance with the laws for preservation of cultural relics. (6) In line with the regulations on distance education, the credits, schooling and degrees acquired by learners in schools of all levels and lifelong education institutions at home and abroad are recognized. PLAR in South Korea focuses on non-formal education, including vocational education, extended university education, education in hi-tech training schools and distance education. [18]South Korea's legislation related to PLAR is quite comprehensive, but we are unable to comment on the state of practical implementation due to lack of data.
9. Japan
The Japanese government established the “Monbusho (Ministry of Education) Review System for Skill Recognition” specifically to encourage the recognition of learning achievements. Some private organizations appraise the knowledge and skills learned by youths and adults through various different channels. The Japanese government supports and recognizes these appraisals by issuing corresponding certificates. Schools also recognize credits acquired through this method. [19]
10. Taiwan
Since the 1980's, Taiwan has passed education laws and policies to steadily promote lifelong learning and learning achievement recognition. Article 16 of the Law on Lifelong Learning passed on June 26, 2002, specified that a system for recognizing learning achievements in non-formal educational activities should be established. Such recognition would provide motivation for lifelong learning and could serve as a reference for admission to schools or promotion assessment. The recognition system should include the recognition of courses, the acceptance of learning achievements, credit validity period, terms for admission acceptance and other items. By the end of 2003, Taiwan created and issued related measures such as "Implementation Rules for the Law on Lifelong Learning" and "Recognition Measures for Learning Achievements in Non-formal Education". The latter included detailed regulations on the recognition of non-formal learning and established a “recognition committee for non-formal education courses”. The actual recognition should be performed by universities, scholarly organizations and educational organizations in Taiwan. In February 2005, a “recognition center for non-formal education courses” was established in Taiwan. In July 2008, Recognition Measures for Learning Achievements in Non-formal Education was revised once again. [20] Unfortunately, these regulations on lifelong learning and credit recognition have not been fully implemented. For example, Taiwan offers course recognition but has not started informal learning recognition; recognition for non-formal learning courses is an individual, separate process lacking a complete framework and organic integration between organizations. [21]
11. International Organizations
In "Agenda for the Future", passed at the United Nations Fifth International Conference on Adult Education in 1997, states that “full acknowledgement of knowledge and skills acquired through non-formal education” shall be guaranteed. In 2004, the resolution at the 32nd General Assembly of UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) officially proposed that investigative research be done on the issue of recognition for non-formal, informal and experiential learning. [22]
In 1995, the European Union (EU) established a "personal skill card" system that allows for timely examination and recording of various skills acquired through channels besides formal schooling and diplomas. In 2001, the EU committee published "Making a European Area of Lifelong Learning a Reality". This document further emphasized the importance of non-formal and informal learning in adult education and the need to break down traditional concepts of the time period and locations for learning, relating “lifelong learning” with “lifewide learning”. In 2002, education ministers of EU countries passed the Copenhagen Declaration and formulated a series of common principles to recognize non-formal and informal learning. The declaration is a guide to action for each country for establishing a recognition system for learning achievements outside school. [23]
Between 1999 and 2004, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development wrote a report on major policies for adult learning based on research of adult learning in 17 member countries. The report emphasized the great significance of PLAR. In 2002, the TRANSFINE project was first launched by the European Universities Continuing Education Network (EUCEN), including 170 universities in 35 countries. The project focuses on the transfer of learning achievements between formal and non-formal education. In 2007, the report "Recognition System: A Bridge to Lifelong Learning" reiterated that a recognition system for learning achievements is the key issue in formulating and advancing lifelong learning policies.
12. China
In mainland China, the concept of PLAR is quite new. Currently, there is only a small pool of PLAR research by a few scholars. However, there is more research on the related subjects of credit banks, credit transfer and recognition for learning achievements. Though research has gotten a later start, there are nonetheless some PLAR practices in China. Examples include: universities having regulations about exemptions from courses or examinations, equivalent credit substitution between non-degree education and degree education for the "Quality-oriented Education for Capital Workers" project, Beijing Language and Culture University's credit recognition for non-degree students converting to degree students, etc. The above practices all relate to formal or non-formal learning, and do not include assessment and recognition of informal learning, or at least not explicitly. As for PLAR, there is likewise no corresponding assessment criteria. A literature review indicates that PLAR research began at the OUC. For example, Zhang Shaogang, Wang Ying and Yin Shuangxu of the OUC published the article "PLAR: a Positive Trial of Distance Higher Education" in the journal Higher Education in China. Wang Ying and Yin Shuanxu published the article "PLAR: Empirical Research of an Informal Learning Assessment Method" in the journal Open Education Research. Wang Ying published "Research and Practice on Recognition of Informal Learning" in China Educational Technology. More scholarly articles and papers are successively being published. The OUC has conducted joint research with Canada’s Thompson Rivers University, which has made outstanding achievements in PLAR. In November 2010, a joint research center was established and scholarly exchange visits were arranged. With the approval of the Ministry of Education at the beginning of 2012, the OUC arranged for scholars to go to Thompson Rivers University and the University of Maryland University College for PLAR training. Thus, the OUC is taking the lead in PLAR research in China. We must also admit that research is still at an early stage and there is a lack of consensus on some fundamental issues; our understanding of PLAR implementation remains superficial. China's study of PLAR, both in terms of domestic implementation or advocating recognition at the national level, will be a long and gradual process.
Ⅲ. Analysis of international PLAR development from a legal perspective
After an examination of international PLAR development, it is not difficult to draw the following conclusions:
1. Laws and regulations are the prerequisite to PLAR development. In some countries, the establishment of PLAR began with the formulation of laws, regulations, guidelines or manuals. PLAR implementation generally begins at the local level, followed by gradual acceptance and positive promotion at the federal or national level. For example, France issued a total of three decrees and also signed some agreements. Education departments of some US states also drafted PLAR regulations relating to their own state. Certain universities, because of their autonomy and law-based administration, also pass their own regulations. South Korea's credit bank system, plan, courses and standards are all published and implemented by way of law. Laws and regulations ensure that the development of PLAR has a legal basis and has rules to follow. Thanks to the stability and continuity of law, the system will continue to develop, and learners will trust the system and be motivated to continue learning.
2. PLAR development must be guided by education policies formulated by the government. Since laws and regulations are by nature stable and continuous, the contents of the regulations should remain broad and general, as PLAR is a new system in the trial stage of assessing all kinds of individual learning activities. While the system is a challenge to operate, it is also of great value in promoting lifelong learning and contributing to the betterment of society. As such, government support and promotion is crucial. When governments recognize the value of PLAR, they actively promote it through their education policies.
3. PLAR development is driven by the pursuit for equality and fair treatment for all. After studying a subject at one educational institution, one should not need to study it again at another educational institution. If one already possesses some knowledge or skill, it is not necessary to re-study it; institutions should treat all applicants fairly. When explaining the reasons for PLAR development, each country usually includes a demographic analysis, a focus on diversity and equality, development of new technology, and sustainable globalization. The early development of PLAR in the United States was aimed at improving education for veterans, while in Canada, Australia and South Africa, the goal was to improve the educational levels of aboriginals, to help the disabled and to train the labor force. Arthur L. Wilson, a scholar from Cornell University, says in his co-authored work Handbook of Adult and Continuing Education that the PLAR campaign is a “quiet revolution”. He believes that in addition to the development of PLAR procedures, PLAR development is driven by society, economy and politics. [24]
4. Regulations are the core of PLAR. PLAR is the assessment and recognition of prior learning, which facilitates the direct transfer of credits after getting enrolled in school. What kinds of learning can be recognized and transferred into credits? What kinds of experience and learning cannot be transferred into credits? How many credits can be transferred from experiential learning? How are they calculated? How can the appraisers’ assessment results be recognized by the applicants? What procedures are involved in learning assessment? What qualifications must appraisers meet? What preparation is necessary before applying for assessment? How to set up financial aid? PLAR regulations must be designed to address these core issues and others. The complexity of regulating PLAR is obvious when one starts to think about the issues. Professions and interests are almost infinitely diverse; certain restrictions must be applied when making assessment. For example, when assessing work experience, the goal is not to establish how many years the applicant worked but to demonstrate that the applicant's acquisition of theoretical knowledge improved and guided his or her work performance. Let us take a policeman in service for 30 years as an example. If he wants to apply for a degree in criminology, he needs to demonstrate that his work performance was guided by his learning of criminology theory.
5. Emphasize procedure and transparency. Procedure is critical for many reasons. It results in democratic and scientific policy making, and feasible and fair enforcement of specific regulations. It contributes to authenticity, objectivity, rationality, equality, fairness and efficiency. In addition to the rationality and fairness of the procedure itself, it is the means by which we achieve good implementation results. Transparency requires that all regulation procedures must be publicized and open and that no arbitrary changes or inconsistent interpretations may be applied. The purpose is to ensure stability and predictability, so as to win over the students’ trust in the school and its regulations. PLAR research practitioners place great emphasis on PLAR procedure. It is no exaggeration to say that PLAR handbooks are all about procedure regulations. For example, the PLAR operation manual of Thompson Rivers University tells applicants what to do and clearly states the responsibilities of staff at the same time. For example, it specifies that an applicant’s question shall be answered within one business day, and that all staff must observe this regulation. Assessment of students is also conducted strictly by procedure regulations. All procedure regulations are published openly so that the public can access the information and play a supervisory role.
6. PLAR is closely tied to jurisdictional area. PLAR regulations may be valid nationally or locally, in multiple institutions of higher education or just one. Within a certain jurisdiction, PLAR develops with its own local characteristics. Internationally, the development of PLAR has always surpassed the planned institution and legislation of each jurisdiction. Through legislation, each nation or region can learn from others and see which PLAR procedures are suited for local adoption.[25] It is understandable that each different jurisdiction creates and applies its own set of PLAR regulations, , but this hampers mutual exchange and communication, causing difficulty in credit transfer across a wider area. Thus, the jurisdictional area makes PLAR development possible, but is also a barrier to further PLAR development. International and interregional communication is necessary to establish agreements to overcome this barrier.
Ⅳ. Major challenges in developing PLAR in China
PLAR development in China faces many difficulties.
First, respect for the law is not as deeply ingrained, staff and appraisers may lack a sense of professional responsibility, and there is the utilitarian tendency to rush to achieve results. These problems may lead to China's PLAR practices becoming superficial and formalistic.
Second, unilateral national education policies and laws are implemented across the country; with China's great regional variation, high volume of students, and diverse experiences, it becomes difficult to make choices. If we choose to implement PLAR on a national scale, it is difficult to calculate the workload and cost involved and to spur initiative for the work; cost could outweigh benefit. If PLAR is implemented locally, the work will be much simpler, but again, credits will not be transferred to other places and its practical significance will be lost.
Third, it is difficult to ensure the quality of PLAR with the current state of education. However, the advantages of PLAR outweigh the disadvantages, and we should research how to avoid or overcome these unfavorable factors. We believe that the following problems should be taken into serious consideration.
1. Education laws and regulations. PLAR legislation must precede PLAR development. At present, the main laws pertinent to higher education include Education Law, Higher Education Law, Vocational Education Law, Regulation of Academic Degrees and other administrative and local regulations. Though "Regulations for the Promotion of Lifelong Education" has been formulated in Fujian and Shanghai, there are no national-levels laws like the Law on Lifelong Learning that clearly regulate adult education, lifelong education and lifelong learning. The overall state of education law enforcement is less than satisfactory. To advance PLAR in China, a high-level law like the Law on Lifelong Learning must first be passed. Second, the Ministry of Education needs to formulate regulations or measures to promote lifelong learning, including credit transfer and PLAR. Lastly, all provincial education departments can formulate corresponding implementation measures or flexible regulations suited to local conditions. In this way, a complete legislative system for PLAR comes into being. Given the difficulty in issuing the Law on Lifelong Learning, we suggest that the Ministry of Education departments in charge of adult education and vocational education arrange for experts to research and draft credit transfer regulations and provisional PLAR regulations. These regulations should specify the definition and boundary of PLAR in the light of international and domestic circumstances, assessment scope, assessment organizations, assessment personnel, assessment procedure, credit recognition and financial aid, etc.
2. Education policy. As laws are closely related to policies, the government usually publishes an education policy aside from legislation to guide the educational development of the nation. Chapter 8 ("Continuing Education") of the National Outline for Medium and Long-Term Education Reform and Development (2010-2020) calls for the construction of a flexible and open lifelong education system to build an "overpass" to lifelong learning. The system promotes horizontal and vertical ties between various forms of education at different levels, and provides more opportunity and choice to satisfy people's diverse needs for learning and development. The system should also facilitate the accumulation and transfer of continuing education credits, and implement mutual linking and recognition of various types of learning achievements. This shows that China has clear policy support for PLAR and that we should proceed with work on details and practical implementation.
3. Design of detailed regulations. Before formulating PLAR regulations, we must first thoroughly learn from existing achievements and experiences to avoid pitfalls. For example, the international Council for Adult and Experiential Learning headquartered in Chicago is dedicated to establishing standards related to PLAR, and higher education institutions refer to those standards to formulate their own regulations. The following fundamental guiding principles should be encapsulated in the design of detailed regulations: recognition of prior learning; fair treatment for all students; member organizations acknowledge and respect the procedures of each school; clear, open and transparent assessment procedures; transferability of PLAR credits; etc. The scope, procedure and requirements for assessment must be spelled out in detail. For example, the PLAR operation manual of Canada’s Thompson Rivers University clearly specifies the school's methods for PLAR assessment, and includes specific procedures for portfolios and examples. The manual covers the entire process from how students make information inquiries to how to obtain results and how to appeal unsatisfactory results.
4. PLAR implementation. Legislation and law enforcement complement each other. Good laws with poor implementation will lead to PLAR remaining a formality. After the PLAR measures and regulations have been formulated, they must be implemented by educational institutions or industries. How can PLAR overcome existing maladies, such as arbitrary handling of agreements, cheating in exams, plagiarism, sitting for examinations in place of others, backdoor relationships, and lax control? Since PLAR is an assessment system which includes prior learning, societal experience, individual preferences and other factors, subjectivity in assessment is unavoidable. If the enforcers lack a strong sense of responsibility, a low quality system may result in which credits are granted once payment and materials are received. Alternatively, if students are not interested in participating in challenging experiences, or they feel it is too cumbersome, students may ignore PLAR. Therefore, how to enforce PLAR and how to prevent academic misconduct and student dishonesty are all important topics.