Comparison of the ACQF and SADCQF: initial thoughts

By: Coleen Jaftha

1. Introduction

This article builds on the ACQF Training Module 3 on ACQF levels and level descriptors (ACQF, 2022b) and ACQF Thematic Brief 10 (ACQF, 2022a) describing the development journey of the ACQF level descriptors. It uses that background as a starting point to compare the African Continental Qualifications Framework (ACQF) with the Southern African Development Community Qualifications Framework (SADCQF).

These are initial thoughts only, and may be used to encourage a much deeper comparison of the ACQF and SADCQF. This analysis may be used to support the referencing of the SADCQF to the ACQF.  

2. Key similarity: overarching reference frameworks for a region or community of countries
   

As a starting point this article highlights that the key similarity between the ACQF and the SADCQF, is that both are Regional Qualifications Frameworks (RQFs)

An RQF (ACQF, 2021d) is defined as a broad structure of levels of learning outcomes agreed by countries in a defined geographical location that can enable one national framework of qualifications to relate to another and, subsequently, for qualifications to be compared between countries. As RQFs, the key features of both the ACQF and SADCQF are embedded in their respective regional policies:

• The ACQF brings together a community of 55 countries and different regions. It is the only transnational qualifications framework working with national and regional qualifications frameworks.
• The SADCQF brings together 16 countries, and SADC is one of the regions in Africa.

As RQFs, both the ACQF and the SADCQF connect and cooperate with the NQFs of the respective member states.

Recalling key definitions (ACQF. 2021a. Thematic Brief 1: concepts and definitions)

National Qualifications Framework

• European Qualifications Framework Recommendation of 2017 defines NQF as ‘A policy and instrument for the development and classification of qualifications according to a set of criteria for specified levels of learning achieved, which aims at integrating and coordinating national qualifications subsystems and improve the transparency, access, progression and quality of qualifications in relation to the labour market and civil society. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32017H0615(01)&from=EN
• An instrument for the development, classification and recognition of skills, knowledge and competencies along a continuum of agreed levels. It is a way of structuring existing and new qualifications, which are defined by learning outcomes – clear statements of what the learner must know or be able to do, whether learned in a classroom, on the job, or less formally. The qualifications framework indicates the comparability of different qualifications and how one can progress from one level to another, within and across occupations or industrial sectors (and even across vocational and academic fields if the NQF is designed to include both vocational and academic qualifications in a single framework). https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/@ed_emp/@ifp_skills/documents/instructionalmaterial/wcms_103623.pdf

Level descriptor

A statement describing learning achievement at a particular level of the National Qualifications Framework (NQF) that provides a broad indication of the types of learning outcomes and assessment criteria that are appropriate to a qualification at that level. https://hr.saqa.co.za/glossary/pdf/NQFPedia.pdf

3. Comparisons

3.1            Similarities

Since both the ACQF and SADCQF are overarching reference qualifications frameworks of a community of countries, they share certain similarities.

In both cases the level descriptors:

• are formulated as regional, generic, broad statements of learning outcomes complexity that can accommodate and value all forms of learning (formal, non-formal and informal) and can be applied and all education and training sectors and across all African Union (AU) and SADC countries respectively
• serve their respective regional agendas and will not capture the same complexities as national level descriptors
• are learning outcomes based, and describe learning at a specific RQF level, regardless of how or where this learning was obtained
• are structured on ten cumulative levels
• are defined by the same three domains of learning: knowledge, skills and autonomy and responsibility
• are grounded in research and consultation.

As RQFs, both:

• serve as a reference and translation tool that may be used to understand and interpret qualification levels on the African continent and SADC region respectively
• serve as a transparent basis for referencing levels of National Qualifications Frameworks (NQFs) or systems to the respective RQF
• provide an orientation for countries/ regions to develop qualifications frameworks or systems and orientate towards common minimum benchmarks for learning outcomes within the continent/ region.

3.2            Observations regarding the development of the two frameworks

The ACQF and SADCQF differ slightly in the inclusion of information on their:

• guiding principles
• developmental approach regarding the decision around numbers of levels and domains of learning
• The explicit learning outcomes approach and relevance to formal, non-formal and informal learning
• levels shown at the top of the matrix
• definitions and sub-elements of domains

These observations do not prevent a comparison of the two frameworks. On the contrary, comparison adds value, by enhancing transparency and mutual understanding of the purpose, features and specificity of each framework.

Guiding principles

• ACQF: A set of principles was established together with the definition of key objectives. The 3 principles of ACQF are: inclusiveness (all levels and types of learning and qualifications); innovation (future proof, open to new demands, skills); openness (to stakeholders needs, lessons learned from international and African practice). The ACQF is defined as an overarching qualifications framework supporting referencing and comparison, underpinned by quality assurance, based on learning outcomes and supporting mutual trust and information-sharing between qualifications frameworks at national, regional and continental levels. The conceptualisation of the ACQF level descriptors is based on three domains (knowledge, skills, autonomy and responsibility), and coherence of the components of transparency, generic scope, developmental and cumulative aspects, and conceptual and technical clarity.
• SADCQF: It is not clear whether similar principles exist for the SADCQF

Developmental approach and decision on number of levels and domains of learning

• ACQF descriptors build on existing literature, research and consultation, guiding principles and a methodological approach to the writing, and is in the public domain.
• There is evidence of consultations regarding the SADCQF development. It is not, however, clear how the SADCQF descriptors evolved and what methodological approach was applied in their development.

Explicit learning outcomes approach and relevance to formal, non-formal and informal learning

• ACQF is explicit about the learning outcomes approach and relevance to formal, non-formal and informal learning hence the wording introducing each level: “Level 1: the learning outcomes related to formal, non-formal and informal learning at this level include…”.
• SADCQF is not explicit but the learning outcomes approach is implied.

Levels shown at the top of the RQF

• ACQF descriptors show Level 1 at the top of the matrix.
• SADCQF descriptors show level 10 at the top of the matrix.

Definitions and sub-elements

• ACQF definitions of each of the domains are included: clear, future-oriented, generically applicable across all types of learning and consistent with the domain descriptions. The ACQF includes the explicit sub-elements of levels and domains. The ACQF includes a level descriptor glossary.
• SADCQF: There are no definitions available for SADCQF domains, the sub-elements are not explicit and there is no glossary.

3.3            Comparing level descriptors by domains

This comparison does an initial analysis of L1, L5 and L10 only, with the text underlined highlighting the similarities and some differences in complexity of learning.

3.3.1 Knowledge domain

Knowledge 

The level descriptors in the Knowledge domains of the ACQF and SADCQF are broadly comparable in terms of complexity at Levels 1, 5 and 10.

3.3            Comparing the skills domain

Skills

The level descriptors of the Skills domains of the ACQF and SADCQF are broadly comparable in terms of complexity at Levels 1, 5 and 10.

3.4 Comparing autonomy and responsibility (A&R)

The level descriptors in the domains Autonomy and Responsibility of the ACQF and SADCQF are broadly comparable in terms of complexity at Levels 1, 5 and 10.

4. Conclusions and next steps

The ACQF and SADCQF have similarities and differences in purpose and are suitable to their contexts.

The comments below are observations only that may be used in a further comparison and /or development of the two frameworks, and do not position one as better than the other:

• Both the ACQF and SADCQF are RQFs and this article highlights their key similarities regarding their conceptualisation as regional structures with their respective descriptors.
• This article only compares levels 1, 5 and 10 of the two frameworks. A more detailed comparison may need to be done later which considers all the levels
• Although different approaches are applied in the development of the two RQFs, their level descriptors are broadly comparable in the three domains of knowledge, skills and autonomy and responsibility.
• A further research will consider a more structured approach to the comparison.

5. Sources

ACQF.  2021a. Towards the African Continental Qualifications Framework – Mapping report. AU-EU Skills for Youth Employability Programme – SIFA Technical Cooperation. Authors: J. Keevy, A. Bateman, E. Castel-Branco, L. Mavimbela, J. Adotevi, L. Sutherland, R. Matlala, U. Kyari and T. Sibiya. https://acqf.africa/resources/mapping-study/acqf-mapping-report-comprehensive

ACQF.  2021b. ACQF feasibility report. Rationale, scenarios and plan. Authors: E. Castel-Branco, E. Mukhwana, K. Allgoo et al. https://acqf.africa/resources/policy-guidelines/feasibility-study

ACQF. 2021c. ACQF Capacity Development Programme. Thematic Brief 1. Concepts and definitions on qualifications and qualifications frameworks. Author: E. Castel-Branco.  https://acqf.africa/capacity-development-programme/thematic-briefs/acqf-thematic-brief-1-concepts-and-definitions

ACQF. 2021d. ACQF Capacity Development Programme. Thematic Brief 3.1. Level descriptors in qualifications frameworks. Overview from 24 African Qualifications Frameworks. Author: E. Castel-Branco. https://acqf.africa/capacity-development-programme/thematic-briefs/acqf-thematic-brief-3-1-level-descriptors

ACQF. 2022a.  African Continental Qualifications Framework (ACQF) Capacity development programme 2021-2022. Thematic Brief 10 ACQF Level descriptors – the story of the development journey. ACQF Newsletter (Issue of 15/03/2022). Author: C. Jaftha.  https://acqf.africa/capacity-development-programme/thematic-briefs/acqf-thematic-brief-10-acqf-level-descriptors-the-story-of-the-development-journey

ACQF. 2022b. Training module 2: Levels and level descriptors. AU-EU Skills for Youth Employability Programme – SIFA Technical Cooperation. Author: C. Jaftha. Contributors: A. Bateman, E. Castel-Branco. https://acqf.africa/capacity-development-programme/training-modules/training-modules-1-to-10-english/training-module-2-levels-and-level-descriptors-in-the-context-of-acqf

Cedefop. 2018. Analysis and overview of NQF level descriptors in European countries. https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/publications/5566

European Training Foundation. 2021a. Regional Qualifications Frameworks initiatives around the globe. A comparative study. Italy: European Training Foundation. Authors: M.  Auzinger (3s), E. Castel-Branco (ETF), A. Deij (ETF) and J. Fellinger (3s). https://www.etf.europa.eu/sites/default/files/202104/rqf_initiatives_around_the_globe_2020_en_april_2021_0.pdf

European Training Foundation. 2021b. Orientation note on Regional Qualifications Frameworks. Author: Bateman, A. https://acqf.africa/capacity-development-programme/webinars/acqf-11th-peer-learning-webinar-1/orientation-note-on-rqfs_final_20210914_web.pdf/view