Search

This Issue Paper on 'Tackling different forms of discrimination in and through education and training' has been produced within the framework of the European Commission's Working Group on Equality and Values in Education and Training. The Working Group (WG) operates within the context of the Commission's Communication of 30 September 2020 on Achieving the European Education Area by 2025 and the Council Resolution of 26 February 2021 on a strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training towards the European Education Area and beyond (2021-2030). Participants of the WG comprise of representatives from Member States and Candidate countries, as well as from relevant EU agencies, stakeholder associations, social partners and international organisations. The WG is coordinated by DG EAC of the European Commission, supported by consultants from Ecorys1. The Issue Paper is a key output related to two WG meetings held on 9 June (online) and 22-23 September (in-person) 2022, and one Peer Learning Activity (PLA) held in Paris on 12-13 December 2022. The WG meetings focused on the EU non-discrimination policy instruments, tackling prejudice and discrimination in education and training relating to religion and beliefs, ethnic and racial origin, disability, sexual orientation, as well as addressing multiple discrimination and intersectionality. The PLA hosted by the French Ministry of National Education in Paris focused on social and territorial inequalities in and through education. This Paper presents some of the major insights, findings, discussions, and inspirational practices that arose from the two WG meetings and the PLA. As an outcome of those discussions, the main aim of this Paper is to frame and give depth to the various presentations and discussions that took place during these events. The Paper addresses six main themes relating to tackling different forms of discrimination and disadvantage in and through education: (1) Tackling discrimination based on ethnic or racial origin, including discrimination against Roma; (2) Tackling discrimination relating to religion and beliefs; (3) Tackling discrimination based on disability; (4) Tackling discrimination relating to sexual orientation, gender identity or expression and sex characteristics; (5) Tackling social and territorial inequalities; and (6) Tackling multiple discrimination: an intersectional approach.

This Policy Paper aims at analysing the most important aspects of Public Responsibility, Financing and Governance of Higher Educations while seeking to formulate a students perspective on the state of play within the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). In doing so it touches upon the very foundation of how and in which socio-political environment educational systems and higher education institutions work nowadays. The European Students' Union (ESU) believes that open access to all levels of education is the cornerstone of a socially, culturally and democratically inclusive society, and a prerequisite for individual and societal development and well-being. ESU sees higher education as a human right, which is guaranteed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. How education is seen in society, how it is funded and how it is governed are tightly interlinked areas. This policy paper focuses on: (1) Public responsibility of higher education (fundamental values; institutional autonomy and academic freedom; academic integrity; intellectual property; education for sustainable development; human rights and democratic citizenship education; digitalization, artificial intelligence, learning analytics and privacy; commodification; partnerships between higher education institutions and industry; internships; and internationalisation and international trade); (2) Financing of higher education (financing of higher education; the funding gap; optimisation of funding of higher education institutions; performance based funding; and education free of tuition fees); and (3) Governance of higher education (students participation; working conditions of academic staff; committees and ombudsmans and leadership, intersectionality and training). [For the 2016 version, see ED587168.]

This technical assistance paper provides policy and guidance to individuals with test administration responsibilities in adult education programs. The Florida assessment policies and guidelines presented in this paper are appropriate for state and federal reporting. Therefore, guidance and procedures regarding the selection and use of appropriate student assessment are also included. Additionally, the following important information for adult education programs is reviewed: (1) The definition of key terms and acronyms; (2) Selection of appropriate assessments by student and program type; (3) Appropriate student placement into program and instructional level; (4) Verification of student learning gains, Educational Functioning Level, and/or program completion; (5) Accommodations for students with disabilities and other special needs; (6) Assessment procedures for Distance Education; and (7) Training for all staff who administer the standardized assessments. [For the "2017-2018 Florida Adult Education Assessment Technical Assistance Paper," see ED591498.]

Education Leadership Data Analytics (ELDA) is an emerging domain that is centered at the intersection of education leadership, the use of evidence-based improvement cycles in schools to promote instructional improvement, and education data science. ELDA practitioners work collaboratively with school and district leaders and teachers to analyze, pattern, and visualize previously unknown patterns and information from the vast sets of data collected by schooling organizations, and then integrate findings in easy to understand language and digital tools into collaborative and community-building evidence-based improvement cycles with stakeholders. In June of 2018, over 100 participants gathered for the Education Leadership Data Analytics Summit at Teachers College, Columbia University in New York City, including researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and funders. This report provides a summary of the central issues, themes, and recommendations for the future of the field that emerged from the discussions at the ELDA Summit event. These issues include building capacity in the field through incentivizing researcher practitioner partnerships, and providing conference and networking opportunities, professional development, certification, and ultimately degree programs to train ELDA researchers and practitioners. Additionally, a central focus of the ELDA field is equity, data security and privacy, in concert with open and FAIR data standards to develop and share de-identified data and tools across contexts. We conclude the report with a blueprint of possible skills and competencies needed for ELDA practitioner training and professional development and provide recommendations for next steps to help grow the field.

This technical assistance paper provides policy and guidance to individuals with test administration responsibilities in adult education programs. Rule 6A-6.014, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), titled, General Requirements for Adult General Education Programs, requires all adult education programs to report all student measurable educational gains and demographic information to Florida's reporting system. State policies outlined in this rule apply to the state-approved assessments that programs may use to report educational gains and are in compliance with both the state and National Reporting System (NRS) requirements. The NRS is the accountability system for the federally funded adult education program, mandated by the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA). There are three important reasons for creating a data-driven accountability system for adult education programs: (1) The U.S. Department of Education (USDOE) requires each state to establish and utilize performance measures for making continued funding decisions for federal grant programs. Furthermore, each state is expected to institute a system for program monitoring and continued technical assistance that is centered on program enrollment and performance. (2) The Florida Department of Education (FDOE) has enhanced its monitoring processes by instituting a data-driven system for determining program performance. (3) The FDOE program administrators can focus attention on establishing program performance targets and program improvement. To assist programs with student and program performance reporting and accountability, Florida's data reporting system and the NRS are uniform and compatible for measuring student's educational gains. Progress is measured in Literacy Completion Points (LCPs). The term, Literacy Completion Point, used by the state is synonymous with the federal term Measurable Skill Gain (MSG). LCPs are required to be reported to show gains and progression in Educational Functioning Levels (EFLs) for NRS. The Florida assessment policies and guidelines presented in this technical assessment paper are appropriate for state and federal reporting. Therefore, guidance and procedures regarding the selection and use of appropriate student assessment are included in this technical assistance paper. Additionally, the following important information for adult education programs is reviewed: (1) The definition of key terms and acronyms; (2) Selection of appropriate assessments by student and program type; (3) Appropriate student placement into program and instructional level; (3) Verification of student learning gains, Educational Functioning Level, and/or program completion; (4) Accommodations for students with disabilities and other special needs; (5) Assessment procedures for Distance Education; and (6) Training for all staff who administer the standardized assessments. [For the 2016-2017 version of this paper, see ED579162.]

Roughly one in five American adults, or approximately 53 million people, live with some type of disability, and their unemployment and poverty rates are nearly double the rates of people without disabilities. Labor force participation for people with disabilities is just 20.2 percent--less than a third of the rate of participation among people without disabilities. However, this is often not by choice. At least two-thirds of people with disabilities are striving to work, whether they are already working and want more hours or are unemployed and looking for work. Many who do find work face limited opportunities and are likely to earn less. For example, a worker with a disability who has a high school diploma earns $6,505 less per year than his or her peers without disabilities. The National Governors Association hosted a learning lab on May 9-10, 2018, in Madison, Wisconsin, titled "Building Inclusive Talent Pipelines for People with Disabilities." Alaska, Arizona, Hawaii, Indiana and Maryland were selected to participate in the learning lab, where they learned about Wisconsin's successes and shared best practices with one another and leading subject matter experts. This paper describes strategies that emerged as best practices in participating states and other states across the country highlighted during the learning lab.

This technical assistance paper provides guidance to individuals with test administration responsibilities in adult education programs. These policies apply to the approved assessments that programs may use to report educational gains in compliance with the National Reporting System (NRS) requirements. The NRS is the accountability system for the federally funded adult education program, mandated by the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA). NRS identifies twelve Educational Functioning Levels (EFLs) in its accountability measures. Four EFLs are in Adult Basic Education (ABE), two in Adult Secondary Education (ASE), and six in English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL). The descriptors of each EFL are entry-level descriptors and illustrate student performance expectations at the particular level. The Florida assessment policy guidelines include the selection and use of appropriate student assessment and procedures for the following: (1) accurate student placement into appropriate program and instructional level; (2) diagnostic information to guide instruction; (3) pre- and post-testing to monitor progress toward goals; and (4) verification of level and program completion. These policy guidelines also include staff training and test security requirements for all staff who administer the standardized assessments and use the results from these assessments. [For the 2015-2016 version of this paper, see ED579158.]

This working paper is the first publication coming out of a project investigating the role of vocational education and training (VET) in developing digital skills in the Australian workforce, using two sectors as case studies--Transport and Logistics, and Public Safety and Correctional Services. The study employs a mixed method approach, combining both qualitative and quantitative analyses. It involves industry training package content analysis, content extraction and analysis from online job vacancy advertisements, and key industry interviews, as well as a quantitative employer survey. In the online job vacancy analysis, a total of 1,708 job advertisements covering 74 occupations/job titles were analysed to explore digital skills requirements. In addition, a detailed content analysis was conducted of 11 training packages, with a specific focus on the qualifications for these occupations. In this analysis, 758 units of competency were analysed to examine how and the extent to which digital skills provision is embedded into qualifications. Findings showed that only a small number mentioned digital skills as a requirement. The training packages for these industries contained significant digital training content but with the majority of these units of competency occurring as electives. These findings raise questions about whether employers are making assumptions about the digital skills of potential employees.

In April 2021, New America's Open Technology Institute (OTI) and the Philanthropication thru Privatization Project (PtP) released a joint proposal that the federal government should invest a substantial portion of the windfall proceeds from future auctions of public airwaves (spectrum) to seed a new Digital Equity Foundation dedicated to addressing equity gaps in broadband adoption and affordability, education, telehealth, access to government services, and other critical areas. The next step in realizing this vision is now in the hands of Congress and other federal policymakers, as allocation of spectrum auction proceeds to support the creation of a Digital Equity Foundation requires legislation. Policymakers will also play a critical role in establishing the guidelines for the creation of an initial foundation board and mission. This paper serves to help flesh out the options for how that could be accomplished, drawing on a review of existing foundations created with public and nonprofit assets to identify best practices for how to start a foundation with public, quasi-public, or nonprofit funds. This paper is structured in five parts. Part I provides a brief overview of the proposed Digital Equity Foundation; Part II, examines some key examples of existing U.S. foundations that illustrate the use of public or quasi-public funds to support priority public needs; Part III, explores ways the proposed Digital Equity Foundation might be structured and organized to achieve its programmatic goals to advance digital equity and inclusion, while operating with appropriate transparency and public accountability; Part IV, considers additional legal considerations that surfaced in a review of foundations previously established under federal legislation; and Part V, provides a summary of concrete recommendations for the proposed foundation. [This report is a joint product of the Open Technology Institute at New America and the Philanthropication thru Privation Project.]

This occasional paper provides the views of 17 "thought leaders" in the Australian vocational education and training (VET) sector. Their insight and opinions were sought to inform a larger research project focused on the student entitlement reforms that were introduced into the national VET system from 2012. These individuals offered a variety of senior-level vantage points on the topics of: (1) Australia's national training system: why it has been developed, what its key elements are, and the aspects where consistency has been sought and the aspects where flexibility has been sought; (2) VET student training entitlements: why this initiative has been introduced and the implications of the agreed flexibility in approach to its implementation by jurisdictions, in terms of maintaining a functional national training system; and (3) the implications of the VET student entitlement initiative for future national VET reform. A particular emphasis has been on the implications of the reforms and the challenges faced in its implementation in the context of achieving a balance between national consistency and jurisdictional flexibility. The interviewees considered key elements of the national training system, namely: standards for VET products (training packages and materials); standards for VET providers; and a flexible training market. The interviewees commented on the consistency and flexibility sought in each of these key elements, highlighting where tensions exist, particularly in student training entitlements. The following are appended: (1) Project statement provided to interviewees about the project and Project protocols; and (2) Interview guide questions. Information about the NVETR Program funding is provided at the end of this paper.

This occasional paper provides an overview of the development of Australia's national training system and is a key knowledge document of a wider research project "Consistency with flexibility in the Australian national training system." This research project investigates the various approaches undertaken by each of the jurisdictions to establish a student entitlement funding model and also examines one of the often overlooked fundamentals of the national training system--the dynamic tension that exists between consistency and flexibility. This paper reflects on the history of vocational education and training (VET) in Australia. A key focus is the development of the national training system, which has emerged over the last two decades. The authors also explore the dynamic tension, built into the system, to achieve both national consistency and sufficient flexibility to ensure that training meets specific local, industry and learner needs. Australia's national training system: goals, objectives and key elements 1992 to 2015 is appended.

The European active population is ageing. In the face of growing skills shortages, both national States and employers need to prolong the working lives of their most experienced workers. While enterprises strive to respond to this challenge, most still have not fully explored the potential of guidance activities in addressing age-related issues in career development. This Cedefop study analyses the role of guidance in the age management strategies of firms. Evidence from this report illustrates how guidance activities allow older individuals to plan their mature career stages and exit strategies in a structured way, increasing the likelihood of successfully prolonging their careers. Guidance also allows firms to maximise the potential of their human resources, by providing tools to assess and develop worker skills and knowledge, as well as strategies to increase the productive contribution of the older workforce. If supported by a life-span perspective, guidance allows for effective age management strategies, with smooth integration in internal processes and covering all staff. The findings of this report encourage further development of the role of guidance in age management strategies, offering insights on the creation of incentives for firms and individuals, on strategies for stakeholder engagement, and on the application of quality frameworks. [This report is the result of team work, particularly Cedefop expert Pedro Moreno da Fonseca, who supervised the study, and of Bert-Jan Buiskool, Paul Vronhoof, and Michel Winnubst of Panteia, who undertook the research and drafted the report. Work was carried out under Cedefop service contract 2012-004/AO/ECVL/MILA/Guidance-in-age-management-strategies/019/11.]

In this report, employment retention and advancement under Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) was examined by reviewing research findings regarding labor market development since 1996. According to the research, most of those moving from welfare to work have found employment in low-wage jobs and experienced frequent job losses and limited upward mobility. The following were among the factors deemed predictive of employment retention among welfare leavers: starting off in higher-paying jobs; working steadily, initially; and finding jobs with benefits. Factors predictive of job advancement included starting off with higher-paying jobs, changing jobs strategically and voluntarily (but not too often), and having or acquiring higher basic skills and postsecondary education or training. The following were among the recommendations offered for federal policymakers: (1) expand TANF to include reducing family poverty and promoting family economic well-being; (2) require that states' TANF plans describe how federal TANF funds and other resources will be used to promote employment retention and advancement; (3) if federal work participation rates are not replaced by outcome-based measures, give states broad flexibility to determine the nature of work activities; and (4) require that federal agencies vigorously monitor state and local implementation of civil rights and employment rights protections afforded under current law. (Contains 31 endnotes.) (MN)

This literature review examines the available research on skill sets. It provides background for a larger research project "Workforce skills development and engagement in training through skill sets," the report of which will be released early next year. This paper outlines the origin of skill sets and explains the difference between skill sets developed by national vocational education and training (VET) industry bodies for training packages and those developed by registered training organisations (RTOs) for particular clients. The researchers consider the rationale for skill sets and explain their role in the national training system. The review identifies a number of perspectives on skill sets and their contribution to the VET system: (1) Some research suggests that skill sets are a valuable VET solution because of their flexibility and capacity to be responsive to changing labour market needs; (2) Skill sets may also provide a quick and more cost-effective option for learners and may appeal to those who might be daunted by the prospect of having to undertake a full qualification; and (3) Conversely, some suggest that skill sets may confine individuals to narrow job roles and reduce their labour mobility. (Contains 4 tables and 1 footnote.) [Funding for this paper was provided through the Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education.]

This paper focuses on issues which affect the capability of technical and further education (TAFE) providers to meet their clients' and stakeholders' needs and draws extensively on the reports of the consortium research program which examined ways to help build vocational education and training (VET) provider and workforce capability. The paper puts this research, most of which was completed in 2006 and 2007, into a contemporary framework. It suggests that TAFE providers need to be free of unnecessary central constraints to help them meet their strategic business needs. This includes more direct control of human resources matters and industrial relations. (Contains 8 footnotes.)

The Australian Vocational Education and Training Management Information Statistical Standard (AVETMISS) for vocational education and training (VET) providers (referred to as "the Standard") is currently being reviewed by the National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER). The Standard is the framework that underpins the National VET Provider Collection. It provides consistency in data definitions, which ensures accurate data for use in national data collections, where information is compiled from many different sources. This discussion paper is the first step in the review. It provides a framework for feedback and identifies key issues for consideration. There are many issues associated with the specification of a Standard, such as what information is to be collected, from whom and how often. Decisions about implementation of the AVETMIS Standard are made by a range of different bodies and, while the focus of this paper is primarily on the information to be collected, comments on the timing and coverage are also welcome. Two appendices are included. (Contains 1 figure.)

This document provides a summary of feedback from the discussion paper for the Review of the Australian Vocational Education and Training Management Information Statistical Standard (AVETMISS) for vocational education and training (VET) providers (hereafter, the Standard). The discussion paper provided opportunities to gather feedback on a range of issues. Based on this feedback, some issues will not be pursued; however, in most cases further investigation is required before final recommendations can be made. This report gives an overview of the process to date and areas where the National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER) will undertake further work on the Standard. (Contains 2 tables and 1 figure.) [For the related report, "Review of the AVETMIS Standard for VET Providers: Discussion Paper", see ED510700.]

This paper aims to contribute to the discussion on the quality and accessibility of underpinning knowledge in competency-based training. It uses the Vocational Graduate Certificate and the Vocational Graduate Diploma in Education Design in a Queensland TAFE [technical and further education] institute to examine how the "traditional" knowledge and theory associated with higher-level qualifications can be accommodated within the framework of competency-based training and assessment. The paper raises some interesting, and provocative, questions about the status and value of these qualifications by comparison with their university counterparts. (Contains 2 footnotes, 2 figures, and 2 tables.)