What legal policies underpin the implementation of micro-credentials in higher education institutions? Do the institutions have existing regulations in place to facilitate the successful implementation of micro-credentials? These are some of the questions that this report, Analysis of the legal framework in Project Partner Countries: A Proposal for the Best Legislative Model, tries to answer, considering the micro-credential landscape in the MICROGUIDE project partner countries: Serbia, Austria, Germany, and Spain.
For a common understanding, a legal framework refers to a system of laws, rules, regulations and principles that govern the implementation of MCs in higher education.
The landscape of MCs in the selected countries is dynamic and evolving, given the uniqueness of national HE legislative policies and institutional frameworks. The legal framework for the implementation of micro-credentials in the selected countries is largely absent or integrated in existing national HE legal frameworks or laws. Some of the concerns bordering the implementation of MCs in HE include a lack of a standardized definition for micro-credentials, the diverse design components of these credentials—regardless of whether they are credit-bearing or not—and the pressing issue of mutual recognition among different universities. Establishing a legal framework for implementing MCs in HE is essential to ensure the effective integration of MCs in the HE landscape.
Addressing these concerns, the MICROGUIDE project recommends the adoption of the legislative model put forth by the European Commission, which allows for necessary adjustments to accommodate the specific characteristics of the university systems in different countries. Crafting a comprehensive legislative framework for MC requires careful consideration of the following aspects:
1. A clear definition in line with the European Commission proposal: A micro-credential is a proof of the learning outcomes that a learner has acquired following a short learning experience.
2. These learning outcomes must be assessed against transparent standards, on the first place by the EU Standard of constitutive elements of micro-credentials:
− Identification of the learner;
− Title of the micro-credential;
− Country/region of the issuer;
− Awarding body;
− Date of issuing;
− Notional workload needed to achieve the learning outcomes (in ECTS, wherever
possible);
− Level (and cycle, if applicable) of the learning experience leading to the micro-
credential (EQF and/or national qualifications framework; Overarching Framework of Qualifications of the European Education Area);
− Learning outcomes;
− Form of participation in the learning activity (online, onsite or blended, volunteering, work experience)
Prerequisites needed to enrol in the learning activity;
Type of assessment (testing, application of a skill, portfolio, recognition of prior learning, etc.);
Quality assurance, including the learning content;
Integration/stackability options (standalone, independent micro-credential/integrated,
stackable towards another credential);
− Any other relevant information.
At the institutional level, MC implementation is, to some extent, informed by a university’s internal quality assurance system and the Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG). Higher education institutions offer micro-credential as they deem fit and typically provide it within the framework of life-long learning or as stand-alone courses while at the same time complying with relevant laws and regulations.
Details of the report can be found here
http://test0.hermodesign.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/02.-Analysis-of-the-legal-framework-in-Project-partner-countries-making-a-proposal-for-a-best-legislative-model.pdf
