Background
1 The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (the Agency) has a responsibility for putting into effect one of the central recommendations of the 1997 Dearing report on higher education and the first, and core, recommendation of the parallel Garrick Committee: the construction of two inter-linked frameworks for higher education qualifications (one for England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and one for Scotland). After two years of development and consultation, which built on prior initiatives in Scotland, this work is now approaching its conclusion.
2 As recommended by the Garrick Committee, the higher education framework for Scotland has been developed as an integral part of a comprehensive Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF), which embraces all Scottish qualifications from school to postgraduate. The SCQF is being developed jointly with the Committee of Scottish Higher Education Principals (COSHEP), the Scottish Executive and the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA). The Garrick report emphasised that 'the realisation of key aspects of the Committee's vision (of Scottish higher education for the next two decades) relies on the adoption by institutions of this framework (the SCQF), and many of our subsequent recommendations are therefore contingent upon institutions taking this forward'.
3 This paper sets out the current position in respect of the framework for Scottish higher education. A parallel paper is being published on the framework for England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
4 The details set out in this paper have been developed through two major consultations and extensive discussions which have resulted in endorsement by the key stakeholder groups. There are some details concerning nomenclature which remain to be finalised and on which views are being sought, as set out in paragraphs 50-51. In addition, there is also a continuing programme of development of the descriptors for the levels and qualifications. This development work is being taken forward with the full involvement of the sector including a series of workshops from May-September 2000. A first draft of the level descriptors (attached for reference at Annex 1) has been considered through the initial series of workshops which has already provided much valuable comment.
5 The framework, including the descriptors, will be published in October 2000 at the same time as the full details of the framework for England, Wales and Northern Ireland are published.
Why is the framework for higher education qualifications being introduced?
6 The framework is being introduced as one of a number of interrelated measures, which include subject benchmark statements, programme specifications and progress files, that originate from the recommendations of the Inquiry into Higher Education. These measures are aimed at making clearer to providers, users and all stakeholders, the purposes and outcomes of UK higher education. They have been developed to meet the needs of an open, expanding and diverse higher education system. The SCQF is increasingly playing a key part in Government strategies for widening access to mass participation in a lifelong learning society.
7 Within the context of the SCQF, the aims of the higher education framework are: to enable employers, learners and the public in general to understand the range of qualifications; how qualifications can contribute to improving skills; how qualifications relate to one another; and to clarify potential routes for progression and credit transfer.
8 The Dearing and Garrick Committees of Inquiry indicated that many employers have difficulty understanding the current complexity of higher education qualifications. In a survey of employers recently undertaken on behalf of the Agency, some 81 per cent of employers reported that they had difficulty understanding the meaning of various qualifications awarded by UK higher education institutions. The framework will make it easier to explain to employers the structure of qualifications.
9 The higher education framework in its wider SCQF context will also help professional and statutory bodies to relate their qualification structures to the wider Scottish context and so assist with the development and recognition of a range of routes to professional recognition and continuing professional development. This was a specific recommendation of the Garrick Committee (recommendation 4).
The framework and quality assurance
10 In an open, expanding and diverse higher education system, the need for clear public information, shared points of reference and consistency of nomenclature assumes a new importance. In addition there is a clear need for assurance about the standards of qualifications being awarded.
11 The Dearing Committee, for example, drew attention to the problems that have arisen at the Masters level from 'a market system operating during a period of increased demand for postgraduate qualifications, without an adequate framework or control mechanism'. It was observed that the problem of reliance on a market system is that, by the time the market has corrected the worst examples of ambiguous standards, damage may be done to the whole of higher education. The report further observed that the experience at the Masters level provided: ' a salutary warning for undergraduate education'. It stated that this demonstrated that, if market influences were introduced 'without an adequate framework or mechanism to ensure the consistent use of titles and corresponding level of award, great damage could be done'.
12 The framework, and the ways in which higher education institutions position their qualifications in relation to the framework, is therefore intended to form one important focus for institutional arrangements for assuring that the standards of their qualifications are appropriate and demonstrated. The framework will also provide one of the key reference points for academic reviews conducted by the Agency. The ways in which the process of academic review will relate to the framework are set out in the Agency's Handbook for academic review. The publication of the framework will be followed by the development and publication by the Agency of guidelines to support institutions in relating their qualifications and structures to the national framework.
Comparison of qualifications across the UK and internationally
13 The Dearing and Garrick Committees recommended that there should be two parallel frameworks for higher education, one for Scotland and one for the rest of the UK, that would reflect the features of the different education systems while also making clear the many similarities and alignments.
14 The two higher education frameworks are based on common principles and components. At the postgraduate levels, the two frameworks are identical and, as indicated below, have common structures and qualification titles. Below the postgraduate levels, the Honours degree levels are considered to be in broad alignment. Below the Honours level, the frameworks reflect the particular features of the different educational structures and contexts. Over time, further appropriate points of alignment may be identified.
15 The positioning of the qualifications of the higher education institutions within the full SCQF will also facilitate comparisons with other kinds of qualifications, including work-based and professional qualifications. This will also enable the establishment of progression and credit transfer opportunities between the full range of qualifications in Scotland.
16 Increasingly, higher education institutions, students and employers operate and compete in a European and wider international context. This further reinforces the need for explicit information about higher education qualifications in the UK. One particular aspect of the international context is the requirements of the Bologna Declaration on European higher education, to which the UK is one of 29 signatories. This Declaration commits the UK to, among other things, the adoption of a system of 'easily readable' and comparable degrees and a clear differentiation between undergraduate and postgraduate qualifications (see below, paragraph 63 for further details of the Bologna Declaration).
Developing the qualifications framework
17 As recommended by the Garrick report, the SCQF has been developed jointly by COSHEP, the QAA, the Scottish Executive Departments for Education and for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning, and the SQA.
18 Within the context of the SCQF, the framework of higher education qualifications has been developed from recommendations put forward to the QAA Scottish Committee by a Qualifications Framework Development Group consisting of representatives of higher education institutions in Scotland and from the SQA. Details of the membership of this group are given in Annex 3. This group also had cross-representation and joint officer working with the parallel development group for England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The Agency has undertaken two major consultative exercises on the principles, policies, structures and main features of the framework. The second of the consultative documents, together with a summary of responses to it, can be found on the Agency's web site. There was also a national consultation in 1999 with COSHEP, the Scottish Executive and SQA on the main features, principles and components of the SCQF as a whole.
19 The process of developing the higher education framework was also able to draw on much of the extensive work already undertaken over a number of years across the sector in relation to the SCOTCAT Framework. This included the current SHEFC-funded initiatives to promote the use of SCOTCAT in readiness for the introduction of credit-based funding.
20 In addition to these general consultations and developments, the drafting of the level descriptors has involved a series of development workshops with the sector which will be followed by further events and consultations concluding in September 2000. These workshops will also consider the draft qualification descriptors.
21 All consultations to date have indicated broad agreement on the need for the framework. It is clearly recognised that the scale, complexity and diversity of higher education, and the competitive environment within which UK higher education institutions operate, require institutions to agree and work within a shared qualifications structure.
22 However, the complexity of the task has also been recognised and institutions and others have generally been eager to work with the Agency to ensure that the framework achieves the aims set. Almost three years have elapsed since the Dearing and Garrick Committees reported. The time taken to achieve the current position reflects the importance of the framework, the complexity of the issues that need to be considered, and the need to involve the higher education institutions in particular, in the development of the framework.
Future development and maintenance
23 The framework, once introduced, must apply to all higher education institutions. It would be unfair, in a competitive environment, if some institutions were to work outside it, for example, by using qualification titles that imply a higher level of achievement than is the case. However, for the framework to have this general applicability it must be able to accommodate new qualifications as the need for them arises. In general, it must also recognise and facilitate diversity and innovation, and promote a wider understanding of Scottish and UK qualifications internationally. It is a qualifications framework, not a straightjacket.
24 In relation to the maintenance of the framework, QAA will work with the higher education institutions in Scotland to ensure that any new qualifications of higher education and other relevant developments are properly accommodated and described. In consultation with COSHEP, we have established a new role for the Scottish Advisory Committee on Credit and Access (SACCA) as the body to advise the Agency on the future development and maintenance of the higher education part of the SCQF. With SACCA, we will also run a number of workshops later this year to support institutions in addressing the framework and the implications for their own structures.
25 In terms of the SCQF as a whole, in partnership with COSHEP, the Scottish Executive and SQA, we are establishing a Joint Advisory Committee (JAC) as the vehicle for implementing and further developing the SCQF in line with the needs of the key stakeholders in education and training in Scotland. Details of the role and membership of the JAC will be published in the near future together with a forward plan of its work. The first meeting of the JAC was held on 28 June 2000.
The introduction of the framework
26 If the aims of the framework are to be achieved, it is inevitable that some current practices will need to be modified. To achieve a new clarity and consistency in the use of qualification titles and the understanding they convey, practices that have apparently developed in an ad hoc manner will need to be reviewed and in some cases revised. An appropriate transitional period will be required to ensure that the necessary changes can be identified, planned and implemented by each institution. In addition, it is recognised that the reasonable expectations of students currently enrolled on programmes leading to particulars awards must also be respected.
27 The Agency plans to finalise the higher education frameworks for Scotland and for the rest of the UK by October 2000. This will coincide with the introduction of the new review method and the start of a six-year review cycle. The six years of the first cycle should be a sufficient period to enable institutions to ensure that they are awarding qualifications in line with the framework. Accordingly, from the academic year 2006-07 there will be an expectation that all higher education qualifications across the UK are awarded in accordance with the principles of the frameworks. During the implementation period, institutions should identify the need for any changes to their practices and plan and implement the necessary changes.
28 The length of the implementation period reflects the need to give adequate notice of any change in the status of a qualification. If in future, for example, in order to reflect accurately the dimensions of the framework, a programme will lead to a lower qualification, such a change could not be introduced in a way that would affect adversely any current student. Allowing for students accepting places on programmes up to a year before the programme starts, six years is a relatively short time in the case of, for example, a qualification awarded at the conclusion of a four-year programme. In such a case, an institution would need to prepare for any changes at the start of the period. This will enable it to ensure that all qualifications awarded from 2006-07 onwards are in line with the expectations of the framework. In many cases little change to existing practice might be required and the framework may become operational well before 2006-07.
The principles underpinning the framework
29 The higher education framework is an outcomes-based structure whose main components are: levels and level descriptors; qualification nomenclature and qualification descriptors; and credits. These concepts are used consistently throughout the SCQF and are shared also with the higher education framework for the rest of the UK.
30 It is important to stress, as indicated above, that the framework is not intended to be, and should not be used as, a straightjacket. The descriptors of levels and qualifications, while setting out clear and meaningful reference points, are nevertheless generic descriptors. The credit definitions of qualifications set out below are designed to set some minimum expectations in terms of overall volume and level of outcome. At the same time, however, they should also support the desirable diversity in the structure of the programmes which reflect the increasingly diverse nature of higher education in Scotland.
31 A number of key principles, established in the light of consultation, underpin the frameworks. These are:
- the framework is based on a series of linked concepts: defined levels; level descriptors; credit; generic qualification descriptors; and, consistency of nomenclature;
- generic qualifications are defined in terms of their level, a generic description and the minimum number of credits, both in total and at the exit level;
- a qualification is awarded to mark the achievement of positively defined outcomes, not as compensation for failure at a higher level or by default;
- each module (or other element of a programme) should be defined in terms of its intended learning outcomes, its level and its credit volume. The level of the module (or other programme element) should be determined by relating the intended learning outcomes and assessment criteria to level descriptors;
- differentiation between levels is not based on the nature of learning or scholarship, eg whether a programme is taught or research based;
- progression in time during a sequence of study does not automatically entail progression to a higher level of learning;
- the nomenclature of qualifications within the frameworks should be consistent and provide an accurate representation of their nature;
- all properly assessed and quality assured learning, wherever or however achieved, can receive credit;
- credit is allocated on the basis of outcomes achieved, not time served.
The nature and number of levels in the framework
32 The levels of the SCQF are defined by broad, generic descriptions of outcomes against which all qualifications, modules (or other programme elements), programmes and individual learner achievement can be positioned. Each level can be the location of one or more Scottish qualifications which can be distinguished by their purpose and character and by the volume of credit required for their award (see below, tables 1 and 2 and paragraphs 53-55).
33 The higher education institutions will position each of their qualifications, modules (or other programme elements) at one level, in accordance with the guidelines which will support the implementation and maintenance of the frameworks. When determining the level in the framework at which a particular qualification should be located - and the title it should adopt - institutions will need to determine its relationship to: the generic level descriptors; the relevant generic qualification descriptors; relevant benchmark information; and the credit definitions of the particular qualifications.
34 As shown below, in Table 1, there are 12 levels within the SCQF, including the six Scottish higher education (SHE) levels: four undergraduate levels and two postgraduate levels. As indicated above, the postgraduate levels are identical across the UK and broadly align at the Honours Degree level.
Table 1
Levels and associated awards within the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework including the higher education levels and qualifications
|
SCQF Level |
Standard Grade |
Other National Qualifications (Higher Still) |
Higher Education |
SVQs |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
12 |
Doctorate |
|||
|
11 |
Masters/postgraduate diploma and certificate |
SVQ 5 |
||
|
10 |
Honours degree |
|||
|
9 |
Ordinary degree |
|||
|
8 |
Dip HE/HND |
SVQ 4 |
||
|
7 |
Advanced Higher |
Cert HE/HNC |
||
|
6 |
Higher |
SVQ 3 |
||
|
5 |
Credit |
Intermediate 2 |
SVQ 2 |
|
|
4 |
General |
Intermediate 1 |
SVQ 1 |
|
|
3 |
Foundation |
Access 3 |
||
|
2 |
Access 2 |
|||
|
1 |
Access 1 |
35 The Agency has reached its position on the number of higher education levels in the framework after consideration of a number of factors including:
- the number of levels that may be meaningfully distinguished and described;
- the principle of the Bologna Declaration that undergraduate and postgraduate qualifications should be clearly distinguished (see below, paragraph 63 for further information);
- international perceptions about particular qualifications (for example, to avoid a situation where the provision of an additional 'higher' masters level might unintentionally undermine the position of existing postgraduate Masters qualifications by encouraging them to be perceived as being inferior to any 'higher Masters' qualifications).
36 On the basis of these considerations, the Agency has proposed only two postgraduate levels, associated with Masters and Doctorate awards.
37 There are some programmes that offer undergraduate material to students who already hold a first degree. These programmes are often demanding, because they are intensive, and rely on well developed learning skills. However, if the assessed outcomes are at undergraduate levels, the qualification awarded cannot be postgraduate. It has been concluded, therefore, that there should not be an additional level, beyond that associated with the Honours Degree, to relate to such qualifications (see also below, paragraph 50).
38 The Agency also considered carefully whether there should be a level associated with a 'higher Masters' qualification such as an MPhil. It was concluded, however, that the main distinguishing feature of such qualifications is not the level of work involved, but the volume and nature of the work. This is discussed further below (see table 2 and paragraph 49.2).
39 In relation to undergraduate levels, the Agency's development and consultation processes re-affirmed the four undergraduate levels established within the SCOTCAT framework.
Level descriptors
40 As indicated above, the levels are broad generic levels of outcome. Each level will have a descriptor, which sets out in relatively brief generic terms a description of broad outcomes associated with each level. The levels and the descriptors are designed as a national set of reference points for use by all providers and all stakeholders and against which any learning outcomes can be located.
41 The SCQF descriptors relate to all qualifications within the SCQF and therefore refer not only to higher education qualifications. For example, at level SCQF 7, the descriptors relate to Advanced Highers, HNCs, SVQs, as well as Cert HEs. The descriptors can, therefore, aim to provide only a general shared understanding of each level. It is extremely important to note that the descriptors are not intended to be prescriptive.
42 The generic descriptors are being developed jointly through the Agency and, where appropriate, SQA, and are the subject of a separate consultation and development exercise with the sector. This has involved a series of consultations and workshops throughout Scotland during May-September, 2000 for which draft descriptors have been widely circulated. (For reference, the initial draft, which was considered at the workshops referred to above, and which are now being revised to take into account the comments from across the sector, are included in Annex 1 to this paper.) There will be further workshops and consultations with the sector and the first working set of descriptors resulting from this process will be finalised and distributed with the final document on the qualifications framework in October 2000. In the light of the potential value of the levels and their descriptors, they will be kept under review in light of feedback from the sector on their use in practice.
Credit
43 Levels and level descriptors provide the national reference points for locating the 'level' of any group of outcomes (a qualification, a module or other programme element etc). Credit points provide the associated measure for describing the volume of outcomes. The definition of the credit point remains unchanged from the SCOTCAT framework and is now shared by the whole of the SCQF. One credit point represents the learning outcomes achieved by the average learner at the relevant level in 10 hours of total learner effort.
44 Through the use of the SCQF credit points, the framework allows the volume of outcomes of all qualifications, modules or other programme elements to be described. The credit definitions of the main higher education qualifications are set out below in Table 2. These definitions specify the minimum total number of credits for each qualification together with the minimum number required at the exit level. The Honours Degree credit definition refers to the minimum amount of credit at levels 3 and 4 to reflect the breadth and depth of the Honours Degree in Scotland. Within these minima, institutions will continue to structure programmes in whatever ways are appropriate to the achievement of the aims of the qualifications, the teaching and learning strategy, and the characteristics of the associated learner groups.
45 Although the SCQF is designed in part to support lifelong learning by enabling, where appropriate, the transfer of credit between programmes and between institutions, there is no intention that the Framework should do other than facilitate this process. It is not in any way a mandatory process, and individual institutions remain solely responsible for all matters of credit recognition towards their awards.
Table 2
Credit definitions of the main higher education qualifications within the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF)
|
Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework: higher education sector |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
Level |
Typical HEI qualifications and their credit definitions |
||
|
(SCQF12) |
PhD/DPhil Not credit rated* |
Other Doctorates Min 540 with min 450 at SHE6 |
|
|
(SCQF11) |
MPhil Masters Masters (following an integrated programme from undergraduate to Masters level study) Postgraduate Diploma Postgraduate Certificate |
Either not credit rated*
|
|
|
(SCQF10) |
Scottish Bachelors degree with Honours ***
|
Qualifications that are graduate** in entry but not level of award |
|
|
(SCQF9) |
Scottish Bachelors degree *** min 360 with min 60 at SHE3 (#) |
||
| (SCQF8) SHE2 |
Diploma of HE min 240 with min 90 at SHE2 |
||
|
(SCQF7) |
Certificate of HE min 120 with min 90 at SHE1 |
|
|
* programmes of work that are assessed solely by a final thesis, or by published work, artefact or performance that is accompanied by a written commentary placing it within its academic context need not be credit rated
** graduate or graduate equivalent
*** a small number of universities have a tradition of awarding 'MA' as opposed to 'BA' in this category
(#) The recommendation for a minimum of 60 credits at level 3 reflects the need to encompass both breadth and depth within the definition. Where there is a clear subject or professional focus to the degree, this minimum requirement at level 3 will normally be exceeded (see also below, paragraph 49.4).
Qualifications nomenclature
46 One principle of the framework previously referred to (see above, paragraph 31) is that the nomenclature of qualifications should be consistent and provide an accurate representation of the nature of qualifications. For many external stakeholders the title used for a qualification will be the main source of information they use to understand the typical characteristics of a qualification. As the range of qualifications has expanded rapidly, so different practices in the use of qualification titles have emerged. For example, the Dearing and Garrick Committees identified five different types of qualification for which the 'Masters' stem is frequently used in the title. Consistency in application of the framework will require institutions to adopt a common approach to the titles they select for their qualifications. The approach to the nomenclature of qualifications suggested below is consistent with that being developed for higher education in the rest of the UK and also with the Bologna Declaration to which the United Kingdom government is a signatory.
47 The relevant principles underpinning the nomenclature are:
- the nomenclature of qualifications should be consistent and provide an accurate representation of their nature;
- postgraduate titles should be restricted to qualifications for which there are sufficient assessed postgraduate level outcomes to meet the definitions for a postgraduate qualification (see above, table 2). Programmes which are postgraduate in time but not level should not make use of a postgraduate title (see also, paragraphs 37 and 49.3);
- at the postgraduate levels the two frameworks for higher education in the UK have a common nomenclature;
- at the honours level, the two frameworks in the UK share a common nomenclature in relation to the Bachelors degrees with honours. A small number of universities in Scotland have a long tradition of labelling certain first degrees as MA. Reports of Agency reviews of such provision will relate to undergraduate benchmarks and will make it clear that the title reflects Scottish custom and practice, and that any positive judgement on standards should not be taken as implying that the outcomes of the programme were at postgraduate level, or that the award was a second cycle qualification within the meaning of the Bologna Declaration.
48 Recommendations to enable institutions to develop qualifications within the framework with clarity and consistency are set out below in Table 3 and the accompanying notes. These recommendations are designed to clarify the nature of Scottish higher education qualifications in both a national and international context without in any way stifling diversity and innovation.
Table 3
Nomenclature of the main higher education awards within SCQF
|
Level
|
Type of Qualification |
Nomenclature |
|---|---|---|
|
(SCQF 12) |
Doctorates | PhD/DPhil Doctor |
|
(SCQF 11)
|
Masters | MPhil Master |
|
|
Postgraduate Diplomas | Any title including terms Postgraduate and Diploma |
|
|
Postgraduate Certificates | Any title including terms Postgraduate and Certificate |
|
(SCQF 10)
|
*Bachelors Degrees with Honours | Any title including terms *Bachelors and Honours |
|
|
Graduate Diplomas | Any title including terms Graduate and Diploma |
|
|
Graduate Certificates | Any title including terms Graduate and Certificate |
|
(SCQF 9)
|
*Bachelors Degrees | Any title including terms *Bachelors |
|
(SCQF 8)
|
Diploma of Higher Education | |
|
(SCQF 7)
|
Certificate of Higher Education |
*See above, paragraph 47
Please note that Honorary Awards are not included in the framework. Responses to the consultations indicated considerable support for clarification and consistency in the nomenclature of honorary degrees. Many responses proposed general adoption of the titles MUniversity and DUniversity for honorary degrees.
49 Notes to table 3
49.1 At level SCQF 12 (SHE6)
The use of PhD and DPhil is restricted to programmes of work that are assessed solely by a final thesis, or published work, artefact or performance that is accompanied by a written commentary placing it within its academic context.
Other doctoral qualifications should provide an accurate representation of the field(s) of study and only be awarded where the credit requirements (minimum of 540 credits of which a minimum of 450 are at level 6) have been clearly demonstrated.
49.2 At level SCQF 11 (SHE5)
The use of a title including the 'Masters' (M) stem, or the word 'Postgraduate' is restricted to programmes of study with specified minimum credits at masters level (see above, table 2).
The title of MPhil should be reserved for awards made in respect of higher volume Masters programmes the equivalent of two years full-time research or a minimum 300 credits with minimum 270 at SCQF11) that involve a substantial element of research or equivalent work.
There is currently a range of extended and enhanced undergraduate programmes leading to qualifications referred to as undergraduate masters (eg MEng, MChem). The Masters title will be available to such programmes where they meet the credit requirements for Masters nomenclature (see above, table 2).
49.3 At level SCQF10 (SHE4)
Programmes of study that typically require graduate (or equivalent) entry but do not meet the credit requirements of postgraduate programmes, but do reflect outcomes predominantly at levels SCQF9 and/or 10 (SHE 3 and/or 4) will use a nomenclature based on the terms Graduate Certificate and Graduate Diploma and a degree title yet to be agreed with the sector.
The particular nomenclature appropriate to the 'postgraduate' certificate in education (PGCE) will be discussed specifically with the relevant stakeholders.
49.4 At level SCQF 9 (SHE3)
At the degree (non-honours) level, unlike the rest of the UK, the Scottish Bachelors Degree has been a long established and widely used qualification. The Garrick report indicated that the role of the Degree should be further enhanced. The title of the Scottish Bachelors Degree within the framework is intended to embrace the various forms this currently takes ie including those which typically offer breadth and those which have a greater focus on a specific subject(s). It is also intended to offer the scope highlighted by the Garrick Report for increased provision at this level associated with wider access to lifelong learning opportunities, including work-based and HND-articulated programmes. Where a degree qualification reflects a specific subject or professional focus, it would be expected that this would be reflected in a higher number of credits at level 3 in that subject/professional area.
49.5 At level SCQF8 (SHE2)
Diplomas of Higher Education will be placed at this level.
49.6 At level SCQF7 (SHE1)
Certificates of Higher Education will be placed at this level.
Some specific matters relating to nomenclature
50 As indicated above, one of the clear principles of the frameworks is that postgraduate titles should be used only for qualifications which have postgraduate level outcomes. A number of postgraduate titles have historically been used for programmes that are postgraduate in level but are designed for graduate entry. The new titles of such Certificates and Diplomas are to be Graduate Certificate and Graduate Diploma respectively. No suitable title has been identified to date, however, for various 180 credit, graduate entry programmes, currently leading to the award of Masters Degrees but which are not at postgraduate level.
Recommendations from institutions on an appropriate title for such qualifications would be particularly welcome.
51 A further aspect of nomenclature that has been highlighted is the range in use of subjects within qualification titles, in particular within honours degrees. To improve the clarity of the subject focus, the Agency is consulting across the UK on the following proposals.
| single subject programme | A |
eg BA Hons in French; BA Hons (French)
|
| joint subjects programme | B & C |
eg BA Hons (Geography & Geology)
|
| single subject with a minor | D with E |
eg BSc Hons in Biology with Chemistry
|
| single subject with 2 minors | A with E & F |
eg BEcon Hons (Economics with Sociology and Anthropology
|
| joint subject with a minor | B & C with E |
eg BSc Hons Sports Science and Physiology with Business Studies
|
| combined studies | as A |
eg BA Hons (Combined studies)
|
| combined studies with a minor | Comb with E |
eg BA Hons (Combined studies with History)
|
Where A represents a minimum of 80%, B and C each represent a minimum of 40%, D a minimum of 75%, and E and F a minimum of 10% of the total credit summatively assessed as contributing to the award of the qualification.
Normally a maximum of three fields of study may be identified in the title.
The Agency would welcome comments on the above proposal.
Defining qualifications - quantitative and qualitative descriptors
52 The framework provides a mechanism, which enables each institution to describe each of its qualifications in two ways: in terms of generic qualification descriptors and in terms of the number and level of credits. These descriptors are designed to be complementary and mutually reinforcing. The credit definitions of qualifications were discussed above and are given in Table 2. The qualitative dimension will be provided through a series of brief qualification descriptors.
Qualification descriptors
53 One of the main aims of the SCQF is to define qualifications and how they relate to one another. Levels descriptors provide information on generic levels of outcome, but any one level may have one or more associated qualifications of different types and purposes. For example, at level SCQF 7 there are Advanced Highers and HNCs as well as Certificates in Higher Education. The outcomes of each of those qualifications will be in general keeping with the level descriptor but each qualification will also have a generic descriptor that sets out the particular purposes, outcomes, and focus of that particular qualification and from which it will be clear how it differs from other qualifications at that level.
54 The descriptors are intended to be concise and expressed in language that is accessible by all who will use them. Most stakeholders outside higher education will find short, generic qualification descriptors, and a consistent use of qualifications title, the best indicators of the typical attributes of both programmes and of the holders of a particular qualification title.
55 qualification descriptors for higher education qualifications are being developed in the context of the SCQF and will also be consistent with the format and structure of those for higher education in the rest of the UK. The qualification descriptors at postgraduate level will reflect the same outcomes across the UK and will be aligned at the honours degree. Descriptors for qualifications in Scotland below postgraduate are being developed in parallel with the work on level descriptors outlined above. For reference, the first draft of the qualification descriptors, which will be considered in detail at the planned workshops and consultations, are included in Annex 2.
Levels, credits and programme design
56 The qualifications frameworks have been designed to bring consistency and a common structure and language within which institutions will describe the particular features and purposes of their individual programmes and qualifications. The framework also provides a tool for assisting programme design.
57 There is no expectation, however, that, other than the minima set out in Table 2, any programme has to follow a set pattern of a specified number of credits at each level. It is for the institution and programme designers to determine the most appropriate structure and progression towards the final outcomes and the award of the qualification. In particular, there is no expectation that, for example, Level 1 credits are always required to be taken in, and only in, year 1. Many full-time programmes offer learners some choice of levels within each year. It is also important to remember, as indicated above, (see above, paragraph 41) that the levels descriptors are not prescriptive.
Responses, further development and timetable
58 As indicated above, the Agency has already arranged a series of development workshops in Scotland on the levels and qualification descriptors from June through September, 2000. The outcomes from these development workshops, in addition to responses to this position statement, will inform the final drafting of the levels and qualification descriptors. This will be undertaken by a small team of QAA officers and individuals from the higher education institutions.
59 There are a number of matters specifically raised for comment in the
section above on nomenclature. Responses on these matters, and on any other
aspect of the position paper, should be received by the Agency by
30 September 2000.
Please send your responses to :
Norman Sharp
Head of the QAA Scottish
Office
The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education
183 St Vincent Street
Glasgow
G2
5QD
60 The Agency will issue a final paper on the qualifications framework in October 2000.
Further information
61 The following documents may be found on the QAA web site at www.qaa.ac.uk:
- report on the survey of employer understanding of higher education qualification titles;
- second consultation paper on the qualifications frameworks;
- responses to the second consultation paper;
- Handbook for academic review.
62 The text of the Bologna Declaration may be found at www.unige.ch/cre/
63 For any additional information, please contact Dr David Bottomley in the QAA Scottish Office (Tel: 0141 572 3420, email d.bottomley@qaa.ac.uk)
Annexes
Annex 1 Draft level descriptors for the SCQF
Annex 2 Draft qualification descriptors for the main higher education awards within the SCQF
Annex 3 The membership of the Qualifications Framework Development Group for Scotland
Top