Mandatory Review of Foundation and Bridging Qualifications

Governance Group Meeting Notes 4 June

Minutes of the meeting held Wednesday 4 June 2014 at 10 am by teleconference
Members attending: Helen Anderson; Anthony Campbell; Tony Cartner; Mino Cleverley (from
10.20); Janet Hay; Nyk Huntington (chair); Mary Manderson; Lindsay Spedding (until 12.30);
Graeme Marshall (except absence due to fire alarm 10.30 10.50).
Other attendees: Denise Holling; Michele Miller; Peter Sherwin
Apologies: Paul Hursthouse; Andrew Kear; Kolose Lagavale; Jo Nicholson
1.

Meeting opened at 10.09 am. Welcome, no update to risk register.

2.

Minutes of previous meetings were accepted as a true and accurate record.

(Marshall/Manderson) AGREED.

3.

Matters arising

H Anderson has agreed to re-join GG. The GG asked her to continue, on the
basis of her expertise in sector, continuity and familiarity with issues around the
reviews (from an ITP stance). Note her current employer is Auckland University
of Technology. She does not represent AUT on this group.

J Nicholson agreed to continue to represent the Private Training Enterprise sector

while she is on contract to her current employer.

Action list
1.

Draft letter to Universities NZ circulated prior to the meeting. Members to forward

suggestions to Team Mailbox, Nyk will finalise them.
Need to clarify sentence about requirements for Immigration.
Add advice for Certificate of University Preparation and Taylors Certificate
Foundation Year to recognise these as programmes rather than qualifications.
Current understanding of Immigration Services rules: a programme is not
available for a Student Visa if it is not on NZQF.

2.

Draft letter to NZQA (regarding a review of the results from all qualification
reviews) circulated prior to the meeting. Members to forward suggestions to
Team Mailbox, Nyk will finalise them.

3.

Learner and industry consultation how can we increase participation by these

groups?
Business NZ, Industry Training Federation, and Employers & Manufacturers
Association have been on mailing list.

Meeting Notes GG 4 June Foundation and Bridging Review

Page 1

 Suggestion to contact the lead persons in the industry development groups for
Vocational Pathways.
Suggestion to contact with student associations.
Alert groups now that consultation is coming in second stage.
It will be important to have consultation on programme level for learners as
these qualifications are broad, learners will be affected by programmes. For
example, 20 weeks not long enough for international students.
Action point 4 has been completed. (GG participation)
5.

ITP Academic Managers forum met in May. Agreed that Denise Holling will be
the contact point with updates or queries.

6.

Draft letter to NZQA (regarding the issues discussed with Study Group)
circulated prior to the meeting. Members to forward suggestions to Team
Mailbox, Nyk will finalise them.

Action points 7-9 have been completed. (correspondence to Youth Pathways

Manager, draft qualifications, consultation document).

4.

Replacement relationships
The replacement map is part of the application (NZQF 1).

Possible issues with mapping - so many existing quals have different credit values to
those proposed, cant all simply map to a replacement qualification. Need for
communication with providers and advice about writing programmes of study. 120
credit current qualifications may map to a programme leading to two new
qualifications. Is this statement written into the rules for writing programmes? (MM to
investigate).

Add in statement next to qualifications which are not foundational or with other
purposes. By listing them separately, GG acknowledges that the owners of these
qualifications do not consider them to be foundational or bridging. GG recommend
further engagement with the qualification owners and communication with these
providers about constructing programmes of study.

Add in reference/explanation for qualifications run in conjunction with universities.

Noted that a 120 credit programme (leading to two new qualifications) may not suit
international students who need a one-year course for Immigration purposes. There
is could be attrition between the two programmes and one 60 credit course at L3
would not give students long enough to prepare for university.

Note that some level 1 programmes cover a broad range of people, some people
need more time at level 1 before they are ready to progress to level 2. This issue
needs addressing to ensure cohesiveness of the qualification framework, an issue
larger than this review.

Meeting Notes GG 4 June Foundation and Bridging Review

Page 2

5.

Discussion of consultation results

a. Request from NZCDI to retain NZCDI Certificates in NZ Studies as separate

qualifications, including brand name. Request included letters of support from individuals
and organisations. The following points were discussed:

The submission has been thoroughly prepared and well presented.

Purpose of programmes is to prepare or develop further the abilities of individuals to

understand society and culture. This could be viewed as different to foundational.

Unfortunate that the timing of the Targeted Review has meant this qualification has
not been able to be taught or implemented.

Rules around qualifications mean that name cannot include 'NZCDI'. The intellectual
property belongs to the programme, not the qualification.

These qualifications could become programmes of study leading to NZ qualifications.

AGREED request to retain certificates and names is declined; letter communicating

reasons to be drafted, Nyk to finalise.
b. Summary of consultation (refer attached)
Individual responses were read by GG. The following points were discussed.
Title Most respondents support the titles. One response indicated that they didnt like
them but would be marketing through their programme name. AGREED to keep titles
of qualifications as they are, but communicate the idea of using different programme
names which would have a context. The programme name should be chosen to
engage learners and increase local understanding.
Total credit value AGREED to retain. Noted need to confirm the ability to have one
programme leading to two qualifications.
Key theme in feedback is lack of available credits for 'content' (either industry-specific
skills or subject-specific knowledge). There are in fact 60 credits of content and
developing the capabilities happens within the content.
Noted need for professional development in writing integrated assessments. These
capabilities are always in context of a particular content area, often assessed together.
An example of a programme of study, integrating capabilities with content, would be
very useful. AGREED to add examples, explanation, and advice for writing
programmes to the consultation document in Stage 2.
Allocation of credits. Some GG members and respondents would prefer not to use
credits for each 'cluster' of outcomes. Current qualification as it is written is
prescriptive about weighting of self, community etc. Academic content has lower
credit value than some would need. However we are required to have indicative
credits. Noted that foundational learners have 'spiky' or 'lumpy' profiles, so there is
sound educational argument for a range of credits rather than specific values.
AGREED to submit credit values with a 10% range and prepare to discuss rationale.
Meeting Notes GG 4 June Foundation and Bridging Review

Page 3

 Students who are doing university foundation programmes want to do a heavily

academic programme. Concern that standardisation of qualification will mean a
standardisation of programmes as well. Need to ensure flexibility in content is
allowable.
Query in one submission - What is the relationship between these qualifications and
NCEA? There is still more work to be done on this, however, NZCFS credits can be
used for NCEA if they are from assessment standards.
Concern noted for benchmarking, fairness, validity, consistency. AGREED that this
must be considered in Stage 2. Programmes must have consistency and
transferability. (What is to stop the you need to do OUR programme to do our
degree?) Evidence of progression could be one of consistency measures.
Some learners will not need the whole qualification, may simply need to fill knowledge
gaps. This may be offered through NCEA subjects.
These qualifications are needed now, for those people who are underprepared.
Bridging programmes have a long history of success, especially for high priority
populations.
Noted many respondents' concerns about strands, names included in titles, possible
proliferation. AGREED to remove strands at qualification level but suggest local need
for different pathways can be met at programme level. Use the word 'pathway' instead
of 'strand' in the qualification descriptions.
Noted concerns of Cert in Anatomy and Physiology and some Certs in Health Science
(preparation for nursing). AGREED these comments are similar to those who need
more 'subject specific' content. Encourage providers to write programmes which
integrate the learning of capabilities in the teaching of their subjects. Another solution
to meet a specific need is to use a training scheme.
AGREED GG need to signal clearly that there is a separate process for University
Entrance equivalence to occur. (It is a larger issue than this review). Suggest GG
apply to CUAP for qualification recognition. Some respondents seem to be assuming
that UE equivalence will happen. Current practice is at the learner level or specific
programme/provider level at the discretion of the university. 'May lead to admission at
a university' could be added to the strategic purpose statement.
AGREED - Need overt academic literacies in profile for level 3 and 4 qualifications.
Noted - International students are already successful in their own education systems,
but they need the year to adapt to a new education system. Want to ensure that
programmes of study that recognise academic pathways will be approved. Not
majority rules some important minorities.
Level 4 qualification includes Level 5 papers want flexibility to be able to do this. Not
often that it is credited into the degree. Should be allowable with the definition of
'certificate' as it is written.
AGREED - Revised qualifications will be circulated, with specific wording changes to
be considered by email; GG will respond by Tuesday 10 June.

Meeting Notes GG 4 June Foundation and Bridging Review

Page 4

6.

Application for Approval to Develop

Michele presented the drafts for the application form NZQF1 and the report form NZQF5.
Any suggestions for change to Michele by email. Will circulate final copies for endorsement
by email. (Nyk to call a teleconference if warranted).
7.

Any other business

a. Transitions Forum who is available to present at the forum? Will develop a collective
presentation by email.
b. Universities NZ is reviewing the current qualifications with ad eundeum statum (AES) at
Entrance level. The list is similar to that currently posted on the Universities NZ website,
and comprises: Accelerated Christian Education (ACE) Certificates of Academic
Excellence; Academic Colleges Group Foundation Studies Programme; ICCE Advanced
Academic Certificate; University of Cambridge International Examinations, International
Baccalaureate; Taylors College Taylors Auckland Foundation Year; MIT Certificate in PreDegree Studies (Engineering); NZIM Certificate in Management or Certificate in Small
Business Management; Steiner School Certificate; Young Enterprise Certificate.
8.

Next meeting:
Nyk explained Stage 2 has these GG meetings:
1. Planning meeting and guidance for working groups. Propose first week August, faceto-face, Wellington.
2. Discussion of consultation and sign-off for application to list (may be by email or
teleconferences).

Stage 2 also has working groups later in that month. Suggest consultation in September and
aim to submit application in mid-November.
Meeting closed at 12.50 pm.

Meeting Notes GG 4 June Foundation and Bridging Review

Page 5

Summary of Consultation May 2014

35 responses 28 joint 7 independent (received by 9 am 4/6/14)

Q1 Are the names of the qualifications easily understood? Do they adequately reflect the
nature and intention of the qualification? Yes 20 No 6
Comments
Is there a potential for confusion using foundation given that there are also
university foundation certificates?
Foundation is an academic term, unappealing to learners. Why not NZ Cert in Work
and Study Skills?
Titles are okay but we will rely on the programme titles for marketing to learners and
industry. They need to be understandable and accessible which the qualification titles
are not.
Q2 Do you agree with the draft descriptions for each certificate as given in the consultation
document? Agree 8 Mostly agree 10 (See separate sheet)
Q3 There are separate qualifications proposed for Bicycle Mechanics and Steiner Schools.
Are there other groups which require separate qualifications? Yes 5 No 11
Comments
NZ Certificate in Business Administration and Computing
NZ Building Carpentry and Allied Trades Skills (with additional content from NCES)
Need an entry qualification to employment in the trades, not a non-equivalent generic
qualification.
CUAP approved and moderated foundation programmes that are not delivered by
universities
NZ Certificate in Health Science
Potentially, a lot of sector groups.
Q4 Are there other level 1 and 2 certificates in this review which would not be described as
foundation? No 9 Yes 1 - NCBCATS L2, NC Basic Residential Property Maintenance.
Comments
Why has NCBCATS been singled out? Whats the difference? GG needs to explain.
Any content can be contextualised to sit in these qualifications.
All level 1 2 quals are foundation for further learning.
BCATS should be moved to Allied Trades better fit.

Meeting Notes GG 4 June Foundation and Bridging Review

Page 6

General comments/Questions

Benchmarking is vital
Concern about fairness, validity, consistency.
What is the relationship between these qualifications and NCEA? What if NZ CFS L1
was achieved would they be able to do NCEA L2?
Include sufficient credits for this qual to be equivalent to University Entrance.
Ask CUAP to include this qual in their review of quals which are equivalent to
University Entrance.
Are the Certificates in Anatomy and Physiology in the right review?
Does the Level 4 provide sufficient academic preparation? Need overt academic
literacies in profile.

Comments on strands

Remove strands suggested by several respondents.

Concern at possible proliferation of strands. May be better to strand at programme
level.
Some respondents agreed with strands, one recommended caution.
Need to allow enough credits for learner to meet UE requirements (only 30 subject
specific, not enough for UE = 42 minimum.)
Where are Maths, Science, English?
Add Business as a strand.
Add an academic strand.

Other specific comments were given for wording of outcomes and strategic purpose
statements.
Credit value
Most responses supportive.
One suggested: L1 2 Smaller (40 CR). 60 CR is an ITP delivery model.
One suggested L2 120 credits.
Strategic purpose statement
Simplify at level 1 and 2. (several responses and suggestions).
Literacy and numeracy should be specifically mentioned.
Graduate profile statements
Very generic too much flexibility?
Suggestions to shuffle GPO between clusters. (L1 - 2)
Improve verbs.
Suggestion to conflate GPO in L3 4.
Need specific lit/num GPO for UE requirements.
Add employment or work focus to level 1
Allocation of credits proposed in the graduate profiles
Use percentages, dont allocate credits several!
Decrease SELF. Increase LEARNING or WORK.
Need more credits for industry specific skills.
Need more credits for subject specific or strands at L3 4.
Concern that te Ao Maori is undervalued (only 4 CR?)
Education Pathway Show pathway to NZ certificates at L3 and L4. Suggestion to clarify wording at L1.
Employment Pathway Add work to level 1.

Meeting Notes GG 4 June Foundation and Bridging Review

Page 7

List of joint contributors

1. ACG
2. Adventure Education
3. Aromaflex
4. Bay of Plenty Polytechnic
5. CDANZ
6. Centre of Foundation Studies Wintec
7. Corporate Academy Group
8. CPIT
9. Early Childhood Education Governance Group
10. Eastern Institute of Technology
11. FABENZ
12. Future Skills
13. G&H Training
14. Naturopathic College
15. Northtec
16. NZ Teachers Council
17. Otago Polytechnic
18. Solomon Group
19. South Pacific Academy
20. Tai Poutini Polytechnic
21. Te Wnanga o Aotearoa
22. Trade and Commerce Ltd
23. UCOL
24. Unitec
25. University of Waikato
26. Waimea College
27. Whitireia
28. Wintec

Meeting Notes GG 4 June Foundation and Bridging Review

Page 8