{"schema_version":"ICEQC_NEWS_ARTICLE_V1","id":"iceqc-news-08e0881a8ea1af86","slug":"2015-08-14-lifelong-learning-evidence-coverage-and-limitations","language":"en","publication_status":"READY_FOR_IMPORT","publication_date":"2015-08-14","last_modified_date":"2015-08-14","title":"Lifelong learning: evidence, coverage and limitations","summary":"Assesses evidence on lifelong learning: evidence, coverage and limitations, with particular attention to definitions, population coverage, comparability and uncertainty.","category":{"code":"DATA_RESEARCH","label":"Data Research"},"article_type":"Data and research analysis","publisher":"International Council for Education Quality Certification (ICEQC)","jurisdictional_scope":"International","historical_reference_basis":"Education 2030 policy framework","reference_authority":"Relevant public authorities and official international sources","sections":[{"heading":null,"paragraphs":["Current consideration of lifelong learning is informed by the Education 2030 policy framework, with consequences for governance, evidence and the treatment of affected learners. In reviewing the available evidence, the available evidence should be interpreted with close attention to definitions, population coverage, collection methods and the limits of comparison. Proportionality requires controls sufficient to protect learners without imposing measures unrelated to the identified risk."]},{"heading":"Evidence base for lifelong learning","paragraphs":["The formal status of the Education 2030 policy framework should be preserved in any public account. For lifelong learning, the instrument should be used to identify the intended direction, the actors addressed and the implementation measures that remain necessary.","The Education 2030 Framework for Action sets out implementation approaches for Sustainable Development Goal 4. It emphasises inclusion and equity, quality and learning outcomes, the issue, coordinated governance, finance and monitoring. National and provider-level use should identify the particular target being addressed, the responsible authority and the evidence of effect; broad alignment statements are not sufficient for accountability.","Responsibility for the measure should be visible at the point where consequential decisions are made. Oversight of the issue should reflect the principle that a sound interpretation should identify the unit of analysis, reference period, denominator, exclusions, missing values and any change in definition or collection practice.","Risk assessment of the analysis should give particular attention to weak connection between training and intended competence, short programmes making unsupported outcome claims, and barriers created by time, cost or location. A provider should also consider fragmented learner records and prior learning assessed inconsistently.","A focused examination of the available evidence requires a clear analytical discipline. Oversight of the analysis should reflect the principle that data quality comprises accuracy, completeness, timeliness, consistency and traceability. Strength in one dimension does not compensate automatically for weakness in another, particularly where the information informs a consequential learner decision. In relation to lifelong learning, an imprecise scope or measure may produce a credible-looking record that does not answer the relevant decision question.","Collection should follow a stated evidential need, not the accidental availability of particular records. In this case, the most relevant material is likely to include secure records of achieved learning, assessment in relevant contexts, defined learning and competence outcomes, and completion and progression data. In relation to lifelong learning, confidence is strengthened by corroboration, not by the volume of records drawn from the same underlying source."]},{"heading":"Coverage and comparability","paragraphs":["Care is required in drawing conclusions about lifelong learning. In reviewing the comparison, employment outcomes are affected by economic and labour-market conditions as well as education. They should not be attributed to a programme without an appropriate design and comparison. Oversight of the available evidence should reflect the principle that missing or delayed information may be patterned rather than random. Material limitations should be stated with the finding presented to decision-makers and affected learners.","A traceable record enables responsibility to be established and errors to be corrected fairly. For the available evidence, the responsible body should be able to identify the evidence considered, the judgement made, the person or body authorised to make it and the action that followed. Material changes require a traceable effective date and explanation so that prior reliance can be reviewed fairly."],"bullets":["Recognise prior learning against published criteria.","Maintain portable records.","Remove avoidable participation barriers before it is relied on for a decision with material effect.","State the purpose and limits of the learning offer.","Review claims against evidence."]},{"heading":"Responsible interpretation","paragraphs":["A proportionate method is available for lifelong learning. In reviewing the comparison, responsible bodies should trace selected records to source, reconcile totals across systems, quantify missing and late submissions, review manual adjustments and retain a revision history. Escalate discrepancies that could alter a published conclusion or individual outcome. Contrary evidence should not be removed merely because aggregate performance appears acceptable.","Decision-makers using evidence on the issue should be told what the data cannot establish as clearly as what it can. Reporting should state whether a result describes, compares or evaluates, together with the level at which it is valid. Use in a different context requires an independent judgement that the settings are materially comparable."],"bullets":["Can reported values be traced to source?","Who may amend a record?","Are revisions carried through to public reports?","Are validation rules operating?","What proportion is missing or late?"]},{"heading":"Limitations and reporting","paragraphs":["Where lifelong learning involves partners, suppliers or several public bodies, responsibility should be mapped across the complete service. Governance between participating bodies should make information duties and corrective authority explicit. Learner safeguards should remain continuous where provision is delivered by several bodies.","The system and institutional dimensions of the available evidence should be considered together. A decision concerning the measure should recognise that flexible learning should remain transparent about entry requirements, learning outcomes, assessment, progression and the uses for which a qualification or record is intended. Authorities and providers hold different responsibilities, both of which must be discharged for the arrangement to operate reliably. The allocation of responsibility should prevent gaps between system oversight and institutional operation.","Responsibility for lifelong learning should be identifiable at each consequential decision point. Delegating operational work does not transfer accountability for its effect on learners. Improvement should be supported by evidence and an accountable decision record capable of public scrutiny."]}],"word_count":864,"content_hash":"sha256-937eafcfdcb9b8b175f832e89f8f089641d16284dc2527caaeb19d486728c9c9","seo_keywords":["lifelong learning","international education data research","education quality","ICEQC"],"schema_type":"AnalysisNewsArticle"}