International
approaches to quality
in career guidance
Report prepared for Skills Norway
Tristram.Hooley
April 2019
i
Acknowledgements
Thank you to Skills Norway for funding this research and to the following informants who
participated in interviews or gave comments on drafts of country papers.
Australia: Professor Jim Bright (Australian Catholic University); Dr Elizabeth Knight
(Monash University); Dr Peter McIlveen (University of Southern Queensland); and Dr
Suzanne Rice (University of Melbourne).
England: David Andrews; Paul Chubb (Quality in Careers Standard); Jan Ellis (Career
Development Institute); Claire Johnson (Career Development Institute); Kathy Leahy
(Assessment Services Ltd – the matrix Standard); and Dr Siobhan Neary (University of Derby).
Germany: Karen Schober (nfb) and Professor Bernd Käpplinger (Glessen University).
Netherlands: Jeroen Bregman (Noloc); Jouke Post (Saxion University of Applied Sciences)
and Dr. Annemarie Oomen.
Scotland: Sandra Cheyne (Skills Development Scotland), Samantha Findlay (Skills
Development Scotland), Dr Marjorie McCrory (University of the West of Scotland); Julie Riley
(Skills Development Scotland) and Dr Peter Robertson (Edinburgh Napier University).
South Korea: Ike Koh (Oasis Consulting); Dr Ji-Yeon Lee (Krivet) and Dr. Hwang Mae
Hyang.
Publication information
This publication should be cited as follows.
Hooley, T. (2019). International approaches to quality in career guidance. Oslo: Skills
Norway.
ii
Contents
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................... i
Contents ......................................................................................................................... ii
Executive summary ...................................................................................................... iii
I. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1
What is quality in career guidance? ........................................................................... 2
About this study ......................................................................................................... 4
II. Country papers ..................................................................................................... 7
Australia ..................................................................................................................... 7
England..................................................................................................................... 12
Germany ................................................................................................................... 18
The Netherlands ....................................................................................................... 22
Scotland .................................................................................................................... 27
South Korea .............................................................................................................. 34
III. Key themes in international practice.................................................................. 38
Techniques used in the domains of quality .............................................................. 38
Key findings ............................................................................................................. 41
IV. Questions for Norway ........................................................................................ 47
V. Reflections ......................................................................................................... 50
References .................................................................................................................... 52
iii
Executive summary
This report explores the issue of quality and quality assurance in career guidance. It is based
on six case studies which look at how different countries quality assure their career guidance
provision. The aim of the study is to use these international examples to inform the
development of a quality system for career guidance in Norway.
The report draws on Hooley & Rice’s (2018) six domains of quality which argue that
quality assurance can variously focus on: (1) career guidance policies, seeking to monitor,
evaluate and check their effectiveness; (2) defining what kinds of organisations should be
allowed to deliver career guidance and how those organisations should function; (3)
considering what processes should be followed in quality career guidance provision and
ensuring that these processes take place; (4) specifying what people can practice career
guidance, what qualifications and skills they should have and defining how the profession
should be organised and governed; (5) clarifying what outcome or outputs should be produced
through the career guidance process and setting out how this can be observed and recognised;
and (6) recognising the experience of the consumers and users of career guidance and finding
ways to capture their perspective. The existing literature on quality in career guidance, along
with the study design, are discussed in chapter I.
The case study countries are discussed in detail in chapter II with a full case study
provided on each country. Each case study explores the countries quality system in relation to
the six domains of quality. The following table provides a brief summary of some of the key
issues and elements in each case study.
Country
Quality system
Key strengths
Key challenges
Well established career
guidance system. Quality
assurance is focused on
the development and
implementation of
professional standards
(the people domain).
The quality system has
been driven by the
profession and has
endured across
different policy
regimes.
Much of the system is
voluntary and so there
are challenges in
ensuring its adoption
and consistency across
the country.
Well established career
guidance system. Quality
assurance is complex and
Comprehensive set of
quality assurance tools
Complex and
fragmented, with the
potential for both
iv
managed through a range
of overlapping
mechanisms.
covering all of the
domains.
confusion and
redundancy.
Well established career
guidance system largely
devolved to the country’s
16 federal states. There is
a major initiative to
develop a national
approach to quality
assurance, but in practice
most quality assurance is
done at the local level.
A range of quality
assurance tools exist at
both local and national
levels. The Be-Qu-
Concept provides a
clear road map to a
national quality
system.
A decentralised system
makes it difficult to
establish a consistent
national approach to
quality.
Well established career
guidance system. There
are a wide range of
different quality
assurance tools
available.
Clear regulation and
policy support in the
education system. The
development of new
approaches to the
quality assurance of
people through the
coming together of
professional
associations.
Fragmentation between
the education and labour
market elements of the
career guidance system.
Much of the quality
assurance on the labour
market side of the
system is voluntary in
nature leading to
challenges with
adoption and
consistency.
Strong career guidance
system and quality
assurance approach
focused around Skills
Development Scotland
as the main delivery
agency.
Skills Development
Scotland acts a
guarantor of quality in
the country and is in
turn overseen by an
independent
inspectorate.
The elements of the
system that are outside
of Skills Development
Scotland are weakly
quality assured.
Emergent career
guidance system. Quality
assurance is largely
focused around
government regulation.
Rapid development of
a clear and coherent
system for quality
assurance in the
education system.
Ongoing initiatives to
improve quality
assurance in the labour
market.
A largely top down
system, which may have
limited sustainability in
the case of policy
changes.
v
Taken together these six countries provide a wealth of quality assurance ideas in each of the
domains of quality. These are discussed collectively in chapter III. The following table sets out
the collected key ideas that are used to quality assure each of the domains.
Domain
Quality assurance ideas
Policy
• Committing to regular review of career guidance policy.
• Establishing research and evaluation agencies or departments to
monitor and support the implementation of career guidance
policy.
• Commissioning independent evaluations of policy.
• Monitoring policy implementation against key indicators.
• Scrutinising career guidance policy through public and
parliamentary committees.
• Providing organisations and resources to support the translation
of policy into practice.
• Publication of an annual report on the implementation and impact
of career guidance policy.
Organisation
• Developing internal quality assurance processes within
organisations.
• Providing organisations with resources and tools for
benchmarking their provision.
• Monitoring the performance of organisations in the delivery of
career guidance against agreed criteria or outcomes.
• Formal inspection of career guidance provision by an external
inspectorate.
• Including career guidance in wider inspections and quality
assurance processes.
• Awarding quality marks to organisations that are judged to be fit
to deliver career guidance, sometimes linked to being able to bid
for government contracts.
• Awarding quality marks that denote the outstanding delivery of
career guidance.
• Providing dedicated funding to help establish career guidance
within new organisations or develop existing organisations
provision.
Process
• Developing a range of internal processes within organisations to
quality assure guidance processes.
vi
• Provision of national or best practice advice on career guidance
processes.
• The development of standardised resources or career assessments
around which career guidance should be organised.
• Observation of practice as part of inspections.
People
• Establishing professional and ethical standards.
• Specifying an approved list of qualifications that can lead to
professional status.
• Providing opportunities for continuing professional
development.
• Creating a register of professionals to allow post-qualification
conduct to be regulated.
• Linking professional status to employment in certain roles or to
access to government funding.
Outputs and
outcomes
• Identifying skills frameworks to describe the anticipated
outcomes of career guidance.
• Measuring student destinations after they leave education
• Using payment-by-results systems linked to either career
management skills or destinations.
Users
• Monitoring usage and user satisfaction with services.
• Conducting large scale follow-up surveys.
• Conducting research into user needs and perspectives.
• Requiring customer feedback and recommendation in the
accreditation of careers professionals.
• Involving user representative bodies in the development of career
guidance policies.
• Using payment-by-results systems which link payment to
customer satisfaction levels.
In addition to this description of the quality assurance options that exist in each of the quality
domains there were also five overarching findings about the nature of quality assurance in the
case study countries. These are discussed in detail in chapter III but are briefly summarised
below.
Fungibility. Each country has assembled its own patchwork of quality approaches. In most
cases some of the domains of quality are ignored or only weakly evident. While there are some
vii
advantages in attending to multiple domains, it is less clear that the benefits associated with
quality assurance stack up the more domains you attend to. Quality assurance domains might
more accurately be thought of as fungible (or interchangeable) where the benefits accrued
through quality assuring the different domains can be achieved through multiple means and
transferred from one domain to another.
Decentralisation. No country has developed a single framework through which the quality of
career guidance across all sectors and jurisdictions is quality assured. This is particularly
challenging in federal countries, but the divisions that exist between career guidance practice
across different sectors also create challenges. The lack of a single national quality system does
not mean that quality assurance is absent in the case study countries. Many of the participants
in this research see value in devolved and decentred approaches to quality assurance that allow
sectors, jurisdictions or even individual providers or professionals to define quality.
Embedded systems. A key challenge in all countries is the fact that career guidance is
embedded in wider systems which often have their own quality assurance processes. The
embedded nature of career guidance means that a key design question is whether it is better to
create bespoke quality assurance systems for career guidance or to embed an awareness of
career guidance in wider systems.
How systems develop. With the sole exception of South Korea, all of the case studies focus
on career guidance systems which are the result of a long history of development. In these
cases, the quality system could be said to have evolved rather than having been designed. South
Korea offers an important example for Norway as it shows how a system can be quickly
established. In this case the establishment of a robust policy framework and clear structures to
support implementation are critical to the rapid progress that the country has made. In all other
countries the quality system has developed through political debates around the nature,
importance and future of career guidance. While the existence of multiple stakeholders seeking
to define and influence quality can mitigate against the coherence of the system, it often leads
to richer frameworks for quality that are capable of sustaining beyond a particular policy
agenda.
Implementation and governance. A quality system is not just a framework that can be
documented and then assumed to be in place. In order to successfully influence practice a
viii
quality system needs to have the following features: clear reasons to engage; consequences for
failing to engage; advocacy and support; and clear and effective governance.
Questions for Norway
The findings in this research suggest several important areas that Norway needs to attend to as
it develops its quality in career guidance system. These are discussed in detail in chapter IV
but can be summarised through the following questions.
• What are the aims of Norway’s quality system for career guidance?
• Is it realistic to create a single, lifelong, national quality approach?
• How should the career guidance quality system relate to wider, existing quality
systems?
• Who should own the quality system or framework?
• What governance structure is needed for the quality system?
• How will the quality system be implemented?
• What is the role of the county careers centres in the implementation plan?
• What data is currently monitored and what new forms of monitoring are needed?
• What information about quality should be made public?
• How far can destination measures be seen as a useful measure of the quality of career
guidance?
• What is the role of the CMS framework in quality assurance?
Reflections
The best approach to the design and implementation of the quality system will need to be
defined by Skills Norway and other stakeholders. However, chapter V offers some reflections
based on this research that may be useful in guiding the development of the system in Norway.
Start by clarifying objectives. It is important for Norway to be very clear on what it is
trying to achieve by implementing a quality system. Key objectives that it may be useful to
focus on include enhancing the user experience, maximising the impact of career guidance
on individuals’ work and ensuring some degree of consistency across the country and
between sectors.
ix
Limit the number of domains that are addressed initially. At present the bulk of the
thinking about quality in Norway has focused on the people domain and the output and
outcomes domain. These seem good places to start, but there may be value in considering
how the overall policy should be quality assured.
Build a system that will sustain. There is value to both the sustainability and legitimacy
of a quality system if it is able to operate independently of government or at least to view
government as only one amongst a range of stakeholders in the system. Skills Norway’s
status as a directorate reporting to the Ministry of Education and Research helps to ensure
this, but there would also be value in considering how wider stakeholders could be made
more central to the development and governance of the quality system.
Consider the role of professional bodies. Internationally careers professional associations
play a critical role in the development, implementation and operations of quality systems.
There may be value in seeking to strengthen the Norwegian careers associations as part of
the implementation of the quality system.
Continue to keep a lifelong focus, but recognise the need for sectoral focus and
prioritisation. As the quality framework is finalised it is important to test it with the full
range of sectors. There may be a need to produce additional documentation and translation
for each sector to ensure that the framework is relevant and easy to use. There may also be
a need to prioritise where efforts should be directed during the first year of implementation.
Implementation is at least as important as design. There is a need to identify an
infrastructure and resources for the implementation of the quality system and then to ensure
that this infrastructure has sufficient authority to lead a wide range of other organisations
in the adoption of the quality framework. One option would be to view the careers centres
as the quality champions in each of the counties. If this approach were to be adopted it
would also be important to have a national body, most likely Skills Norway, overseeing
and quality assuring the careers centres themselves.
1
I. Introduction
The term ‘quality’ is a slippery one and includes within it the sense of something done well as
well as the ideas of consistency and reproducibility. When we start to apply these ideas to an
activity such as career guidance we are faced with a wide range of choices about exactly what
we mean by quality, how it can be measured, benchmarked and assured in practice. The
development of a quality framework for career guidance in Norway provides a useful
opportunity to reflect on these issues and opens up questions about what the implications, both
positive and negative, are of instituting a new definition of quality and a quality assurance
process on the emergent Norwegian guidance system.
Norway is engaged in a long-term and systematic project to develop a world-class
career guidance system. The development of this career guidance system was given focus in
2014 following the OECD’s (2014a; 2014b) skills review. This provided further policy support
and impetus to efforts taking place within the country to develop career guidance and create a
lifelong guidance system drawing on evidence and practices from the rest of the world. Key
efforts have included establishing a national co-ordinating group within Skills Norway and
investing in postgraduate level training for careers professionals. These interventions contain
within them implicit understandings of quality, suggesting for example that both some degree
of national consistency and a minimum level of professional skill are important components of
quality career guidance in Norway.
As the system has developed there has been a need to make the definition of quality
more explicit. This has led to the creation of a major project by Skills Norway which brings
together career practitioners, academics and policymakers to develop a framework for quality
in career guidance (Skills Norway, 2018). This current report is intended to supplement and
inform the findings of this project by reviewing the approaches taken by a range of international
comparator countries.
A key aspiration of the current project is to establish a national, lifelong quality system
for career guidance in Norway. This is a laudable aim, but one which this report will show does
not really exist in full in any other countries, where both regional and sectoral fragmentation
are common. While this helps to clarify the size of the task it should not lead to despondency.
Norway is uniquely placed to build on the lessons from other countries and to capitalise on a
2
national consensus in policy and practice that career guidance is important and needs to be
made into a more important component of the countries education and employment systems.
Given this is it useful to begin by exploring further what the literature has to say about
quality in career guidance.
What is quality in career guidance?
This report draws on Hooley and Rice’s (2018) review of quality and quality assurance in
career guidance. Hooley and Rice review the existing literature on quality and use it to propose
a conceptual framework for thinking about quality within the field. They argue that the term
‘quality’ belies a wide range of ideas and approaches about what is being sought, who it is
being sought for, what strategies might be used to achieve these aims and how we can be sure
that they have been achieved. They note that in other fields the term ‘quality’ is used in wildly
divergent ways to describe professional standards, organisational features, processes and
outcomes. They also argue that within education the practice of quality assurance has a troubled
history which is ultimately bound up with what you think education, or career guidance, is for
and whose interest you want it to work in.
The question about why we are concerned with quality is not one that should be skipped
over. Does quality seek to ensure fidelity of practice to policy, consistency (between what?),
an enjoyable or useful experience for users, the maximum impact (on what?) and so on?
Considering what quality systems are really trying to achieve is likely to have a big effect on
the way that they are conceived, monitored and assured. Each different aim and conception
will serve different stakeholders, open up different possibilities and raise different challenges.
I will return to these issues when I look at the different domains that can be quality assured.
Hooley and Rice outline three main challenges that are immediately presented when
thinking about how to define and assure quality in career guidance: (1) that career guidance is
lifelong and so typically exists across a range of different contexts (schools, public employment
services and employment); (2) that career guidance is the concern of multiple areas of
government, meaning that policy makers in different departments and jurisdictions need to be
simultaneously engaged to create any kinds of national consensus around what constitutes
quality in the field; and (3) that career guidance is typically embedded within wider educational
and employment processes, meaning that attempts to quality assure it as a specific activity have
3
to vie for time and space with wider forms of quality assurance that exist in the systems in
which it is embedded. These issues are critical in defining the quality systems that are described
in the six countries that participated in this research and all are likely to be critical areas of
concern for the development of a quality system for Norwegian career guidance.
Previous work has looked at how career guidance can be conceptualised and addressed
within career guidance (e.g. Almeida, Marques, & Arulmani, 2014; Bimrose, Hughes, &
Collins, 2006; Simon, 2014). Much of this work addresses similar issues to those already raised
in relation to wider conceptions of quality and quality assurance. Quality, in career guidance,
as in other areas, is a contestable concept where definitions matter as do questions of power
and control. Plant (2001) summarises many of these questions as follows.
Who “owns” the standards or guidelines? How are they put to use? With
which sort of consequences? How are they interpreted, maintained,
developed, and enforced? Who has the power in the process of developing
and adapting such standards or guidelines? Do they attempt to cover all
guidance settings across sectors? In cases of clarification, who can appeal
on the interpretations, to whom, and with which consequences? (p. 7)
Hooley and Rice extend these questions asking how far we can be sure that different approaches
to quality assurance deliver service improvement and how far they have the potential to distort
existing activities in unexpected ways? All of these questions remain relevant in considering
how the Norwegian system develops.
This paper will draw on two frameworks proposed by Hooley and Rice to aid in the
consideration of quality in career guidance. Firstly it will make use of their six domains of
quality which argue that quality assurance can variously focus on: (1) career guidance policies,
seeking to monitor, evaluate and check their effectiveness; (2) defining what kinds of
organisations should be allowed to deliver career guidance and how those organisations should
function; (3) considering what processes should be followed in quality career guidance
provision and ensuring that these processes take place; (4) specifying what people can practice
career guidance, what qualifications and skills they should have and defining how the
profession should be organised and governed; (5) clarifying what outcome or outputs should
be produced through the career guidance process and setting out how this can be observed and
recognised; and (6) recognising the experience of consumers and users of career guidance and
4
finding ways to capture their perspective. This framework is descriptive rather than prescriptive
and there is no evidence to suggest that one of these domains is more important than any of the
others. Indeed, as Hooley and Rice argue, confirmed by the research undertaken for this report,
many countries combine a number of these approaches together to create their quality assurance
system.
The second framework which I will refer to from Hooley and Rice is their four
approaches to quality assurance. While the domains of quality describe what is being quality
assured, the approaches describe how this is being done, and how it relates to wider questions
of power and control. They argue that quality assurance processes can be: (1) regulatory which
assures quality through mandatory requirements often backed up by legal or other forms of
sanctions; (2) advisory where quality is defined and specified but there are limited or non-
existent sanctions; (3) organic where quality is controlled internally by the sector, the
profession or the users of career guidance services; and (4) competitive where market
mechanisms and league tables are used to drive quality improvements. Again, this typology is
descriptive rather than prescriptive and different approaches are often combined in practice.
These different approaches to quality highlight the fact that quality is not a fixed set of
standards but rather a series of social practices. Whatever domain is focused on and whatever
approach is taken there is still a need to implement, evaluate and ultimately develop the quality
approach to take account of both internal and external changes. Some approaches have
foregrounded this dynamism by talking about ‘continuous quality improvement’ and
recognising that quality is as much a journey as a destination. In this paper I will explore how
quality systems operate and how various social, regulatory and professional practices can
interact with formal documents and statements of what constitutes quality.
About this study
This study is based on six case studies of quality in career guidance in Australia, England,
Germany, the Netherlands, Scotland and South Korea. It is important to exercise some caution
in drawing conclusions from international comparator countries. The lending and borrowing of
policies is something that should always be done with careful attention to the cultural and
political context from which the policy is borrowed and into which it is inserted (Sultana,
2011). As Maze, Yoon and Hutchison (2018) note the quality and nature of career guidance is
5
not simply a technocratic policy design question, but rather one which emerges out of national
wealth, history, culture, citizens’ expectations of government, politics and governmental
structures.
The aim of this study is primarily descriptive. It seeks to draw out what happens in each
of the case study countries and to use this to explore what is constituted as quality and how
quality is assured. It is hoped that some of this exploration may be of use to the countries which
have contributed and even more widely to other countries concerned with quality in career
guidance. The rationale for this study has been to inform current developments in Norway, but
it does not present an in-depth discussion of the situation in Norway. In the chapter IV several
questions are posed, based on the research, which are designed to aid the development of the
Norwegian system and in chapter V I offer some reflections on possible directions for the
Norwegian system. However, the design, development and implementation of the Norwegian
quality system must remain as a question for Skills Norway and the other stakeholders
involved.
The case studies are presented in chapter II of the report and were gathered through a
common methodology. In each case an interview was conducted with one or two key
informants asking them to describe their countries approach to quality assuring career
guidance. They were asked questions about each of Hooley and Rice’s domains of quality and
approaches to quality assurance to see whether this model provided a good description for their
system. In addition to providing interview data all participants also provided key documents
and literature to inform the case study.
Following the initial interview(s) I created a country paper for each country and then
sent it to the original informant for feedback. I also engaged other key contacts from the
countries to review the paper and provide additional feedback. The country paper was then
iterated with feedback from all participants. In some cases, this resulted in up to seven drafts
as there was not always agreement by all participants on how the quality assurance system in
the country worked. This helped to reveal the political and contested nature of quality systems.
However, in all countries I eventually arrived on a draft of the country paper that all participants
could accept.
The country papers are presented in chapter II of the report. Chapter III then considers
the findings from all six countries and draws out some key themes and issues. Chapter IV poses
6
some questions that may inform the development of the quality system in Norway and then
chapter V offers some reflections on possible ways forward for career guidance in Norway.
7
II. Country papers
This chapter sets out six country papers. They are presented in alphabetical order and broadly
follow a common format as defined by Hooley and Rice’s frameworks. At the start of the
project a longlist of countries was drawn up between the researcher and Skills Norway to
identify where good practice might exist. The case studies were then selected based on: (1) a
review of existing literature to identify where interesting practice might exist; (2) the existing
knowledge of the researcher; and (3) the interests of Skills Norway. The case studies were
exploratory and so were not intended to be representative of the full range of quality approaches
available. In the future there would be value in using a similar methodology to explore the
quality systems that exist in additional countries.
Australia
Australia is a federal country made up of 6 states and 2 territories. Most of the career guidance
systems
1
are organised at a state level, with different jurisdictions taking different approaches
on career guidance and quality assurance. In addition to jurisdictional differences there are also
important differences in the approach to quality in career guidance in schools (which in turn
are divided into state, Catholic and independent sectors), technical and further education
(TAFE) institutions, higher education, adult services and the private/independent sector. All of
these differences can make it difficult to discuss ‘Australian career guidance’ when each state
has a different system, each with its own complexities e.g. in South Australia responsibility for
career guidance is divided across two government departments.
The Federal government has periodically intervened in career guidance policy and has
contributed quality assurance elements that are adopted in the various Australian jurisdictions
such as the Professional Standards for Australian Career Development Practitioners (Career
Industry Council of Australia (CICA), 2011). However, such national interventions impact in
different ways across the various jurisdictions and sectors.
1
General the terminology of ‘career development’ is used in Australia rather than that of ‘career guidance’.
However to aid comparison between different case studies a consistent terminology has been utilised.
8
Practice in the domains of quality
Policy. Career guidance policy emerges at national, state and sectoral levels. Many of these
policies are accompanied by approaches to monitoring their implementation and effectiveness
and sometimes by formal evaluations and review (e.g. see Rainey, Simons, Pudney & Hughes,
2008). However, such formal evaluation of policy initiatives is not required and does not
always happen.
Organisation. There is little formal definition or regulation that exists around what kinds of
organisations can deliver career guidance. In some cases, federal or state career guidance
programmes require organisations to employ staff who comply with the CICA professional
standards, but this varies across programmes.
Where organisations deliver a wider variety of services than career guidance external
regulation typically comes in the form of wider regulations e.g. the requirement on schools to
safeguard children is a general regulation rather than one which is specific to the practice of
career guidance within the school. Such general regulations also have an impact on the delivery
of career guidance, however they are rarely concerned with the specific elements of quality
related to career guidance.
The Career Industry Council of Australia (CICA) (2014) has produced a Benchmarking
Resource which specifies the way in which career guidance in a school can be organised and
provides a quality enhancement process through which this can be implemented. At present
this remains as a voluntary and self-administered quality enhancement process. A similar
approach can also be seen in the New South Wales’ school to work reporting (NSW
Government, 2016) and Victoria’s Transforming Career Education programme which both
monitor government schools’ performance against a number of key criteria related to the
school’s delivery of career guidance and related services.
At present there are no formal badges or awards that recognise and signal organisations
that deliver career guidance to an adequate, or high, quality. Although, some discussions have
taken place under the aegis of CICA which have explored this as a future possibility.
Process. There is no clear national framework for the quality assurance of career guidance
processes. Within some organisations approaches exist which quality assure process (e.g. peer
9
observation and supervision), but these are locally driven and patchy in implementation. In
some cases, state governments create policies and frameworks which specify the delivery of
certain types of career guidance. For example, recent initiatives in Victoria have provided
resources and guidance to support schools to deliver quality career guidance, but this is not
generally supported by any kind of systemic inspection or observation of practice.
2
This is in
line with all education practice in Australia where, for example, there is no national systematic
school inspectorate nor widespread external higher education oversight after providers are
registered every 7 years. For example, there is no system of external examiners in higher
education although informal peer-review is growing in importance.
People. The quality assurance of professionals and professionalism is well developed in
Australia and is driven by CICA and the professional associations. CICA originally published
Professional Standards for Career Development Practitioners in 2004 in response to the
OECD’s (2002) review of career guidance in the country (McIlveen & Alchin, 2017). This
document has gone through several subsequent iterations. The standards address: terminology;
membership of the profession; professional ethics; entry-level qualifications; continuing
professional development and guidance on competency (CICA, 2011). These standards are
currently being reviewed and updated with the revision expected to be implemented from 2019
(CICA, 2017). The standards are then supplemented by a list of endorsed qualifications (at both
Australian Qualification Framework level 4 [Certificate IV] and level 8 [Graduate Certificate])
and a register of practitioners.
The register of practitioners provides a formal, but voluntary, mechanism for
practitioners to align themselves with the standards and to make their professional status
publicly transparent (CICA, 2015). Some professional associations offer an equivalent status
to registration as part of their membership with some practitioners choosing to take out dual
registration. The list of approved qualifications helps to ensure standardisation and consistency
in the training of professionals (McIlveen & Alchin, 2017).
The professional standards are managed by CICA with the co-operation of the
individual career development professional associations. The professional standards were
2
See https://www.education.vic.gov.au/about/programs/Pages/transforming-career.aspx for further information
on the Victorian Transforming Career Education programme.
10
developed as part of a purposeful professionalisation process by the careers sector to provide
reassurance about quality to policy makers and the general public (McMahon, 2004). They
went through extensive consultation with stakeholders and have continued to evolve in
response to changes in the landscape (Miles Morgan, 2005). As a result, CICA now provides a
cross-sectoral and cross-jurisdictional framework for quality which is delivered through the
professional associations quality assuring the people who deliver career development through
their education and training programmes and organisational standards.
At present the professional standards remain voluntary with limited and inconsistent
sanctions for those who choose to stay outside of them. In contrast careers practitioners who
are psychologists (e.g. organisational psychologists and general psychologists engaged in
career development) are regulated by the federal government’s Australian Health Practitioner
Regulation Authority. They may also be members of the Australian Psychological Society
which is not part of CICA. Another important group engaged in careers work are human
resource specialists working within organsations. These HR specialists may be a member of
the Australian Human Resources Institute or the Institute of Management, neither of which
have a relationship with CICA. Such professionals will vary both in the amount of careers work
that they are engaged with and in the extent to which they associate their professional identity
with the career guidance field.
The implementation of the CICA standards is therefore dependent to a large extent on
professional buy-in and this in turn is dependent on professionals associating themselves with
the career guidance field, which many careers workers do not do. The main external drivers for
the adoption of the CICA professional standards comes from funders (e.g. jurisdictions
commissioning career guidance programmes) and employers. There has been a growing
engagement with these standards with an increasing number of contexts requiring practitioners
with professional qualifications and incorporating the professional standards in job descriptions
and management practices, but there is still some way to go to make adoption of the framework
universal.
Output or outcome. There are three main frameworks which exist to specify the outcomes or
outputs that are expected of career development in Australia. These are the Core Skills for Work
(transferable and employability skills); the Australian Blueprint for Career Development (career
management skills), and the Australian Curriculum (the countries broader curriculum framework
11
which includes a number of career and employability related learning outcomes for year 9 and 10
students) (McIlveen & Alchin, 2017). These various frameworks provide some useful clarification
of what outcomes are expected, but policy support for them has waxed and waned. Consequently,
the level of assessment of whether these outcomes have successfully been achieved varies
considerably by contexts. Given this, these frameworks offer potential tools for quality
enhancement rather than a consistently implemented quality system.
Careers work in the welfare to work sector and public employment services is focused
on job matching and uses versions of payment by results (linked to an employment outcome)
to drive practice (Cumming, 2011). Providers in this sector are less likely to insist on
practitioners being qualified or registered than those in the education system. Consequently,
the outcome related payments serve as the only real quality assurance beyond the initial
selection of providers by government.
Users. User involvement and the monitoring of satisfaction varies across different sectors and
jurisdictions. One of the best developed approaches is New South Wales’ Student Pathways
Survey. This survey measures students’ self-efficacy in a range of areas including employment-
related skills, goal setting, job choice, career information and support, pathway options, career
and transition planning, and intended school exit destination and timing (see Bell, Smith &
Bright, 2005). On completion of the survey, students receive a personalised report which
reflects their current thinking and offers ways to improve their confidence and capacity to self-
manage their personal career and transition pathway. The survey therefore serves the dual
purpose of providing career development support to young people and data that can be used to
monitor the impact of services and drive quality enhancement.
Within higher education the Quality Indicators for Learning and Teaching (QILT)
initiative brings together destinations data and student experience surveys to provide insights
on higher education institutions.
3
While this does not directly measure the outcomes of
university careers services, the data has the potential to be used for this purpose. Some similar
data is also available for the VET system (e.g. see NCVER, 2014).
3
For more information about QILT see https://www.qilt.edu.au/.
12
Approaches to quality assurance
There are a range of different quality approaches in evidence within Australia. The most
strongly developed and implemented initiatives are centred around the quality assurance of the
people who deliver career guidance through the definition of professional standards,
registration processes and endorsed qualifications.
Neither the market, via consumer pressure, nor the federal nor state governments
currently serve to make quality assurance in Australia consistent nor mandatory. Psychologists
working in the careers field provide an important exception to this as they exist under a
regulatory framework provided by the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Authority.
However, for the rest of the profession, the quality of career guidance largely assured through
a range of voluntary standards and frameworks (the advisory approach). The profession and
the wider careers sector have played an important role in the development of the quality
systems for Australian career development and continue to be critical to the development and
implementation of quality. This suggests that the country is also strongly influenced by the
organic approach to quality assurance which emphasises professional autonomy, self-
regulation and iterative development of services.
England
England is part of the United Kingdom, but in most respects has a distinct career guidance
system from that which exists in the other UK countries. The country has a well-developed
career guidance system, but one which has received inconsistent policy support from
governments during its history (Hughes, 2017; Watts, 2013). The country’s career guidance
system is fragmented with essentially distinct systems existing in schools and colleges, higher
education, adult community services, the public employment service and the private sector.
Career guidance in the country has benefitted from several initiatives to enhance
quality. These provide some useful and effective approaches to quality assuring different
aspects of quality, but do not cohere together into a single quality assurance system. The closest
the country has to an over-arching document designed to set a national quality assurance
approach is the Department for Education’s (2017) Careers Strategy although this is largely
focused on career guidance for young people. This document commits the country to ‘high-
quality career provision’ and endorses a number of different approaches to ensuring and
13
assuring this. However, it does not provide an over-arching framework for quality across all of
the country’s youth and adult careers services.
Although career guidance in England is strongly sectorially-divided and there is no
single national approach to quality, many of the quality assurance approaches are in use across
multiple-sectors. However, in most sectors the role of career guidance specific quality
assurance plays a secondary role to wider quality assurance processes. For example, within
schools and colleges, the inspectorate, Ofsted, serves as a guarantor of quality. Within Ofsted’s
(2015) Common Inspection Framework there is a requirement that learners are provided with
‘choices about the next stage of their education, employment, self-employment or training,
where relevant, from impartial careers advice and guidance’ (p.14) and, where relevant that
they should be provided with ‘employability skills so that they are well prepared for the next
stage of their education, employment, self-employment or training’ (p.14). This provides a
basis for some quality assurance of career guidance as part of these broader quality assurance
processes. However, in practice it can often be challenging to get inspectors to pay sufficient
attention to career guidance when they are inspecting more broadly. Ofsted is also directly
responsible for the inspection of the National Careers Service which will be discussed in the
next section.
Practice in the domains of quality
Policy. The Government provides guidance on the appraisal and evaluation of policies in The
Green Book (HM Treasury, 2018). This specifies that policies should assessed on five cases:
the strategic; economic; commercial; financial; and management. Policies should include a
plan for both monitoring and evaluation at the point of development. In practice, the
implementation of monitoring and evaluation is often patchy in part due to the speed and
political nature of much policy development, implementation and reform. However, policies
are regularly evaluated by the Department responsible for implementing them. The usual
process is to commission an independent evaluation, often after the policy has been
implemented (e.g. Bowes et al., 2013). Another tool that is available to government for policy
evaluation is the National Audit Office which exists to scrutinise government spending. The
National Audit Office has periodically been involved in the review of career guidance policies
(e.g. National Audit Office, 2014). Finally, monitoring of careers policy also happens at the
political level through the House of Commons Education Select Committee which holds key
14
government agencies to account and conducts occasional reviews of whole policy areas
including career guidance.
Organisation. As discussed earlier the inspection agency, Ofsted has a remit for inspecting the
provision offered by schools and colleges and reaching a judgement on the fitness of purpose
of those organisations. In most cases career guidance is a minor aspect of these inspections, but
Ofsted also has the remit to inspect and pass judgement on organisations that deliver the
National Careers Service. In these cases, the focus on the quality of career guidance is to the
fore and the judgement that is made is primarily one about the fitness of the organisation to
deliver career guidance. In addition to the activities of Ofsted there are two main standards that
quality assure organisations as being fit to deliver career guidance.
The first is the matrix Standard (Assessment Services Ltd., 2017) which is owned by
the Department for Education and used to quality assure all providers of information, advice
and guidance services, including, but not limited to, providers of career guidance. The Standard
has been in existence since 2000 and built on pre-existing quality standards. The Standard is
voluntary, but in some cases (such as the National Careers Service) organisations are required
to hold the Standard if they wish to access government funding. The Standard requires
organisations to demonstrate effective: leadership and management; resources; service
delivery; and continuous quality improvement. The matrix Standard requires organisations to
establish clear outcomes and monitor themselves against them, rather than specifying particular
benchmarks for service delivery.
The framework for quality provision in schools and colleges is established by the
Department for Education’s (2017) Careers Strategy. This in turn draws on the Gatsby
Charitable Foundation’s (2014) benchmarks for effective practice. These set out eight areas
(the ‘Gatsby Benchmarks’) which schools and colleges should focus on when providing ‘good
career guidance’. The Gatsby Benchmarks are focused on concrete activities that must be
delivered e.g. young people should have the opportunity to meet an employer or working
person in every year that they are in the education system. Institutions are provided with a self-
15
assessment tool (Compass
4
) which allows them to relate their own provision to the Gatsby
Benchmarks and identify areas for improvement.
There is also an externally assessed national standard which schools and colleges can
use to assure the quality of their careers provision and relate it to the Gatsby Benchmarks (The
Quality in Careers Consortium, 2018). The Quality in Careers Standard
5
has existed in various
forms since 1992 and has now evolved to be a single national quality award delivered by a
number of local, regional and national awarding bodies (Andrews & Chubb, 2017). The
Standard is governed by a Consortium
6
uniquely comprising the leading professional
associations for school and college leaders as well as the leading careers professional bodies in
England. The Standard is currently held by around a quarter of English schools and colleges
and is ‘strongly recommended’ by government in its statutory guidance to schools, although it
remains voluntary. Institutions pay to be assessed against the Standard and this is commonly
connected to some consultancy provided alongside the accreditation process. The Standard has
recently been fully aligned to the Gatsby Benchmarks to the extent that no organisations will
be able to hold the Standard without meeting the Benchmarks.
Process. Many organisations in England have internal quality assurance approaches which
define and ensure the process of career guidance, however there is little standardisation. Recent
work by the professional body, the Career Development Institute (CDI) (2018a) has developed
a quality framework for observation and self-reflection for one-to-one career counselling
interventions. It describes how observations should be organised and then provides a
framework for feeding back how far careers professionals work within the framework set out
by the National Occupational Standard (see next section). This framework is not formally
required, but the CDI advise that it can be used in conjunction with the Quality in Careers
Standard.
People. Professional standards have been driven by the UK-wide professional association, the
CDI. The current approach to professional standards has its roots in the report by the Careers
Profession Task Force (2010) which was commissioned by government to set out a ‘vision for
4
More information about Compass can be found at https://compass.careersandenterprise.co.uk/info.
5
More information about Quality in Careers can be found at http://www.qualityincareers.org.uk/documents/the-
guide-to-the-standard.pdf.
6
More detail on the Consortium and its Board can be found at http://www.qualityincareers.org.uk/about-
us/consortium-and-board/
16
a transformed careers workforce in England’ (p.2). This argued that careers work should be
professionalised, that at least a degree level (level six) qualification should be achieved by
those in professional practice and that professionals should commit to continuing professional
development.
These recommendations have been broadly endorsed by government and the CDI has
driven their implementation. Key areas of work have been the creation of National
Occupational Standards accompanied by Blueprint of Learning Outcomes for Professional
Roles, a Code of Ethics, the establishment of a list of approved and regulated qualifications
which offer both an academic and a work-based route to professional status and the
development of a publicly accessible professional register. The professional register includes
a requirement for CPD for all registered professionals.
7
Taken together this approach offers a comprehensive approach to the definition of
quality and quality assurance of careers professionals within England. However, this
framework only applies to CDI members and there are relatively weak sanctions on
practitioners and organisations that choose not to engage with the CDI. Recent guidance from
government to schools and colleges (Department for Education, 2018a; 2018b) provides some
advisory support for this professional framework by suggesting that practitioners should hold
a relevant qualification, but it is not mandatory. Some government contracts also recognise the
value of qualified professionals, but this does not extend to all relevant contracts, for example
the public employment service does not normally require that staff advising clients about career
and employment issues hold qualifications at level six or above.
There are no sanctions on practitioners who do not have any qualifications but continue
to practice. The professional association hope that the existence of the register can provide a
basis for some market regulation of the field e.g. clients actively choosing professionally
qualified practitioners over those without qualifications. However, at present public
understanding of career guidance and the quality arrangements that govern it is low.
7
See the Careers Development Institute’s websites for resources on professional qualifications
(https://www.thecdi.net/GettingQualified) and professional registration (https://www.thecdi.net/Professional-
Register-).
17
Output or outcome. There is very little formal definition of the learning outcomes expected
from career guidance in England. There are several useful frameworks which provide some
possible definition of career management and employability skills outcomes e.g. CDI (2018b)
or Enabling Enterprise (2018). However, none of these frameworks have a clear statutory basis
and none have achieved clear market dominance.
There is more interest in destinations measures. The government has invested in
developing a first destination measure which covers the school and vocational education
system and published guidance on how this can be used to enhance career guidance
(Department for Education, 2018c). This is already being enhanced by new longitudinal data
created by linking school data with tax data (Department for Education & Office for Students,
2018). There is also an established destinations measure for higher education which measures
both six month and two and a half year destinations (HESA, 2018a). This survey is currently
being reformed and relaunched and will focus on outcomes 15 months after graduation (HESA,
2018b).
While destinations data is frequently used to judge the performance of institutions it is
not used explicitly as a measure of the quality of career guidance. However, attention to
destinations data, especially in higher education where such data drives university ranking
systems, has often resulted in both investment in career guidance and the performance
management of career guidance services.
The National Careers Service, which works with adults in England, provides an
example of how a range of outcomes can be used as part of the quality assurance and
management of a career guidance service. The government provides funding for National
Careers Service providers based on both career management outcomes, defined as taking an
action to develop your career, and jobs or learning outcomes, defined as finding a destination,
(Education & Skills Funding Agency, 2018). Payment is made for providers based on the
achievement of these outcomes for individuals using the service.
Users. Many providers of careers services are interested in capturing client satisfaction,
however there is no single or standardised measure. Probably the most developed customer
satisfaction measure is the research undertaken by the National Careers Service which
examines customer satisfaction levels (e.g. Ipsos Mori, 2016). In recent years the measurement
18
of customer satisfaction in the National Careers Service has been linked to a payment by results
system.
Approaches to quality assurance
Quality assurance in England draws on a range of different approaches. There is some statutory
regulation and requirements for particular approaches demanded by funders (regulatory), but
most government guidance is optional for organisations and professionals (advisory). The
professional association has been important in driving quality assurance and professional
support and feedback is common in practice (organic). There is also a strong interest in the use
of league tables, payment by results and other market mechanisms (competitive).
There is much to learn from the approach to quality assurance of career guidance that
is currently in use in England. However, there would be value in considering whether the
various innovations that are in evidence in the country could be more effectively brought
together into a more cohesive system.
Germany
Germany is a federal country in which education policy is devolved to the 16 federal states
(länder). The level of interest in career guidance and quality assurance varies across these states
with some (e.g. Northrhine-Westphalia) having stronger systems than others.
The public employment service works across all of the federal states and plays an
important role in the delivery of career guidance in both the labour market and the education
system (Klueger, 2015; nfb 2014). The organisation has a tripartite structure which means that
it is funded and governed by employers, trade unions and government representatives from
national, regional and local level.
Universities are autonomous organisations which manage career guidance services for
their students. A number of other organisations (e.g. trade unions, VET colleges) also deliver
career guidance with minimal formal regulation. The federal nature of the country, combined
with the multiple sectors and locations in which career guidance is delivered makes for a
complex quality assurance landscape.
19
Career guidance is well established in Germany although it is typically divided between
‘educational guidance’ which is concerned primarily with individuals’ engagement with the
education system and ‘vocational guidance’ which is concerned with their relationship with
work (Euroguidance, 2018a, nfb, 2014). The National Guidance Forum for Education, Career
and Employment (nfb), which is an independent network which brings all of the key
stakeholders in career guidance together, has been an important force in developing national
approaches to quality assurance.
8
However, other bodies, including state governments and local
companies and associations that have been involved in defining and supporting quality in career
guidance have arguably had more of an impact on the way quality in career guidance is
practiced. Such arrangements are typically local in nature and confined to a particular sector.
The BeQu-Concept is the key framework that has been established by the nfb and the
University of Heidelberg to support the development of quality in career guidance in Germany
(nfb & University of Heidelberg, 2016). The development of the framework was funded by the
German Federal Ministry of Education and Research but this support has not resulted in the
framework being required by policy makers across the country (ICCDPP, 2017a). The
framework is seen as a ‘bottom up’ initiative that has provided an important organising
structure for conversations about quality in the country. However, at present its implementation
is patchy with many competing approaches to quality assurance existing in the federal states.
Practice in the domains of quality
Policy. There is no clear national policy on career guidance. Policy in this area is often
fragmented across a range of different levels of government, departments and agendas. The
federal states have a lot of control over guidance policy and each of them will establish their
own programmes and, if desired, approaches for monitoring and evaluating these programmes.
Organisations. The BeQu-Concept includes several elements that relate to the quality
assurance of organisations. It suggests that organisations should have a mission statement,
setting out the purpose, strategy, goals and ethical principles of its guidance services; that the
organisation should have clearly defined processes, workflows and responsibilities, which
promote guidance as a communicative social service; that there should be a constructive and
8
See http://www.forum-beratung.de/english/index.html for further information on the National Guidance Forum
in Education, Career and Employment (nfb).
20
participative culture of communication and collaboration within the guidance organisation;
there should be adequate human and material resources for the specific guidance service offers;
and that the organisation should build good collaboration with its partners and other relevant
actors in the social environment.
In practice the BeQu-Concept is not fully operationalised, although it has been
influential in the development of the internal practices of a number of organisations.
Organisations that have attended a BeQu workshop can formally self-assess themselves against
the BeQu-Concept and place the BeQu-Label on their organisation.
The public employment service has a range of internal quality assurance and
enhancement procedures for their guidance services. However, these are internal and not fully
transparent. Similarly, university student counselling and careers services will typically devise
their own internal quality assurance processes rather than seeking quality assurance from
outside.
Private providers of careers services need to be quality assured and certified if they are
going to seek government funding or funding by the public employment service. This is done
by issuing a certificate following a robust process of investigation which typically include the
completion of self-reports, visits, interviews and inspections. This certificate usually has to be
renewed every three years or so. Certification is usually defined at the federal state level with
accreditation processes being provided by acknowledged private certification institutes.
9
Process. The BeQu-Concept includes a number of elements focused on process such as
encouraging the development of a good relationship with clients; a focus on the co-definition
and co-production of the outcome of guidance and an emphasis on careful analysis of the
clients’ needs and development of solutions which empower the client.
In practice there is little formal quality assurance around such process dimensions
although approaches like manager, peer observation and external supervision are frequently
used within careers services.
9
For example see Kos (https://www.kos-qualitaet.de/) or Weiterbildung Hessen e.V.
(https://weiterbildunghessen.de).
21
People. The BeQu-Concept provides a strong statement of the expectations on clients in terms
of professional behaviour, ethics and standards. It notes the importance of professionals being
appropriately qualified but does not specify a particular level of qualification.
The BeQu-Concept has informed the professional associations which cover career
guidance practitioners. Each of these has a set of standards and guidelines which regulate
professional qualification and behaviour. The BeQu-Concept has helped to align these, but they
remain diverse.
Additional specification on professional standards are provided sectorally and within
some of the federal states. In some cases, adherence to such standards may be specified as a
condition of government funding (e.g. Berlin, Hessen, Baden-Wuerttemberg).
Outputs and outcomes. The outputs and outcomes of career guidance are understood, but not
specified in detail. The public employment service is expected to deliver education, training or
employment outcomes for all of its clients. There is considerable political pressure on the
public employment service to deliver this, and successful labour market integration or
enrolments in VET are part of the PES’ steering indicators. Schools are expected to ensure that
young people are clear about their career plans. Again, this is not formally measured. There is
no clear national framework for career management skills although some frameworks exist at
the state level.
Users. Several providers of career guidance seek user feedback and monitor customer
satisfaction. But this is not standardised and there is no clear and consistent approach. The
public employment service runs an annual survey looking at customer satisfaction. The
findings from these surveys are used as part of the evaluation and accountability of the public
employment service. There is also some research data which provides further insights into user
experiences and “job readiness” after using the career guidance service of the public
employment service (e.g. Shore & Tosun, 2017).
Approaches to quality assurance
Viewed from one perspective quality assurance in Germany in career guidance is fragmented.
However, the important role that is played by the federal states means that the picture varies
considerably across the country with some states having more developed approaches than
22
others. Such an approach is in tune with the countries federal and decentred approach to policy
marking.
The nfb has played an important role in creating a national framework for
standardisation though the BeQu framework. However, this is best seen as a work in progress
and one which has limited influence in many federal states. As such the quality system in the
country can best be described as being a mixture of advisory systems through which quality is
specified, but with limited or no sanctions and organic systems which are driven locally by
professionals and organisations.
The Netherlands
The Netherlands has a strong tradition of career guidance. Career guidance can be found in the
education system, the public employment service, employers and trade unions and in the
private sector (Euroguidance, 2018b). Guidance in education and in the labour market are
largely organised separately with minimal cross-over in terms of quality assurance processes.
The Ministries of Education, Culture and Sciences, and of Social Affairs and
Employment are both involved in shaping the policy environment in which career guidance is
practiced in the Netherlands. Policy in the Netherlands is typically characterised by a liberal
approach, a limited willingness to regulate and faith that market forces will ultimately resolve
issues of poor quality. However, within this broadly liberal approach there is a greater
involvement of public policy in the education system than in the labour market. Career
guidance remains weakly professionalised but in the private market the Dutch Association for
Career Guidance Professionals (Noloc) has been a key driver of quality assurance processes,
particularly in relation to the quality assurance of people and professional skills and has
recently begun the process of merging with the Career Management Institute (CMI) which is
another body which oversees the quality of career guidance in the country.
Practice in the domains of quality
Policy. There are a range of government policies which seek to manage the quality of career
guidance in the Netherlands. These include both the provision of funding and regulatory
policies, particularly in the education system. The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
has funded the continuation of an initiative led by the Dutch Secondary Education Council
23
(VO-raad) and the Netherlands Association of VET Colleges to establish the Career Education
and Guidance Centre of Expertise (Euroguidance, 2018b). This organisation exists to aid in the
translation and implementation of policy into practice.
There is no systematic approach for monitoring the quality of career guidance across
all sectors. However, many policies are accompanied by a commissioned evaluation or other
monitoring systems. For example, the quality of career guidance in secondary education and
the VET sector is legally monitored by the Educational Inspectorate. This results in the
publication of an annual report.
Organisation. Schools and VET colleges have a legal responsibility to deliver career guidance.
This responsibility is quality assured through the Inspectorate of Education who inspect
provision in education and report on the quality of provision (including career guidance
provision). The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science also encourages schools and
colleges to draw up their own career guidance agenda and to pursue a strategy of self-reflection
and self-improvement.
Career guidance in higher education is less clearly defined and regulated, but career
guidance will sometimes be addressed in reports by the Accreditation Organisation of the
Netherlands and Flanders (NVAO) which has a broader remit for quality assuring provision in
higher education.
Provision of career guidance services in the labour market functions as a quasi-market
with government awarding contracts following a tendering process. Two formal quality awards
have been created to assure the quality of organisations. One of these (Oval) is focused
specifically on career guidance service providers, while the other is a broader quality mark
aimed at a range of advisory services in labour market guidance. These are not mandatory but
are often used to help to differentiate between bidders during the tendering process. It is also
hoped that the existence of these quality marks will help citizens to differentiate between
different providers, but in practice this is limited in impact.
Process. Within the school and VET system, policy has defined the requirement to provide
career guidance services. Since 2017, the Inspectorate of Education are involved in quality
assuring this and will observe practice as part of inspections.
24
There is more limited regulation of the processes on the labour market side. Some
providers of career guidance in the labour market have internal monitoring systems for practice,
but there is no consistent national approach. The Ministry of Social Affairs has begun the
process of implementing ‘career-checkups’ which establish a standardised career assessment
to be used in work with older workers to assess their labour market potential. The Ministry
requires that the ‘career checkups’ can only be administered by NOLOC-certified-
professionals.
People. There is no legal protection for the title and professional status of career guidance
practitioners in the Netherlands. Anyone is entitled to set up as a careers professional and to
practice without qualification or regulation. However, qualifications and registration are likely
to be a clear advantage in gaining employment within labour market services and career
guidance providers. Careers teachers in schools and the ‘studieloopbaanbegeleiders’(education
and career guidance professionals) in VET and HE are usually qualified subject teachers, but
are not required to have any specialist expertise in career guidance. Recent policy has made
more training available to careers professionals in the school and VET system as part of a
strategy to improve the quality of career guidance in the education system. However, the Code
of Conduct for teachers does not make any reference to career guidance.
There is limited formal training for careers professionals in the Netherlands. Careers
professionals come from a wider range of different professional background and normally take
any qualifications once they have begun to practice. While some universities of applied science
offer degree programmes these are typically broader in nature (e.g. in human resource
management) and offer limited options for specialisation in career guidance. There are also
some opportunities for continuing professional development for job coaches and for career
teachers and a more detailed, academic programme in career management run by the Open
Universiteit.
Two quality marks/professional registers currently exist (Noloc and CMI) to provide
quality assurance of professionals. The two quality marks are being brought together into a
single quality mark, to be hosted by Noloc. The development of this new, national quality mark
is designed to strengthen the standing of the profession with citizens, organisations and policy
makers and has been driven by the professional association.
25
The quality marks do not cover school-based careers teachers and school-based career
counsellors or the education and career guidance professionals in VET or HE and so their use
is largely confined to the labour market side of provision. Euroguidance (2018b), at the behest
of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, has drafted a framework for careers
professionals in the education sector which outlines qualifications and what career education
and guidance practitioners at differing levels within schools should ideally know and be able
to do. But, at present this document has no process for monitoring compliance.
10
This has been
supported by relevant professional associations e.g. the Netherlands Association of School
Guidance Practitioners (NVS-NVL) and the Association of Career Guidance Practitioners in
Secondary Education (VvSL), but it remains optional and advisory.
Most careers professionals other than careers practitioners in the educational sector
register themselves in the professional register of Noloc or CMI (Euroguidance, 2018b). The
new combined quality mark will require careers professionals to pay a fee and seek
reaccreditation every four years. To achieve the quality mark professionals have to submit their
CV, show that they have a relevant qualification and training in career counselling, that they
have at least three years general work experience and at least one year of careers practice. They
then they have to produce a commentary reflecting on their experience and their practice. To
achieve reaccreditation they have to show they are keeping up with CPD. Noloc also has a
tribunal process that can hear cases of malpractice and potentially discipline members or strike
them off of the register.
The public employment service, Uitvoeringsinstituut Werknemersverzekeringen
(UWV), requires all employees to sign up to a Code of Conduct. This regulates the management
of information, customer service, integrity and professionalism. However, the career guidance
component of the UWV is limited and the service is typically more focused on the
administration of the benefits system.
Outputs and outcomes. There is no clear common statement of the outcomes that an
individual should expect from career guidance. Many careers practitioners will seek to agree
10
See https://www.expertisepuntlob.nl/ for further information on this framework.
26
desired outcomes with clients during the guidance process but these will be individual and are
not typically monitored.
As discussed already, the country does not have a defined curriculum for career
guidance which specifies learning outcomes. However, within vocational schools the career
competencies defined by Kuijpers, Schyns and Scheerens (2006) are built into the curriclum:
motive reflection; quality reflection; work exploration, managing career and networking
Outside of the education systems there is also a career management skills framework which is
owned by Noloc.
Within the school system schools are sent data by National Cohort Research (NRCO)
which keeps track of pupils and students after they leave school.
11
However it can be difficult
to use this kind of destinations data as a clear quality assurance process for career guidance.
Users. There are a range of ways in which the user perspective on career guidance is gathered
but these vary by sector. In the VET sector there is a biannual survey which monitors student
satisfaction including their satisfaction with career guidance. While in other sectors monitoring
the satisfaction or perceived usefulness of career guidance is less formalised.
For practitioners in the labour market there is no formal monitoring of client
satisfaction, but some practitioners and organisations will offer feedback forms and follow up
surveys. The CMI does ask for letters of recommendations from clients as part of its
certification of careers professionals, so this provides another way in which the user voice can
be heard.
Bodies which represent the user voice such as the Association of Secondary School
Pupils (LAKS), the Association of Students in Senior Secondary Vocational Education (JOB),
the Dutch National Students’ Association and the National Student Union have also often been
involved in campaigning on career guidance and are regularly consulted by government.
Approaches to quality assurance
The Netherlands is a liberal country which generally seeks agreement among stakeholders
(sometimes described as the polder-model of economic and political consensus building) and
11
For further information on NCRO see https://nationaalcohortonderzoek.nl/over-nco/.
27
avoids compulsion in policy making. This means that much of the activities around the quality
assurance of career guidance are advisory in nature. However, within secondary education and
VET career education and guidance is mandatory, without further guidelines. Within the labour
market quality is reinforced by market mechanisms which incentivise engagement with quality
through the awarding of contracts where those holding quality awards may be advantaged.
Within the education system, particularly the vocational schools, there is more of a willingness
to take a regulatory approach through a combination of specifying requirements and then
inspecting against them.
At present there is limited awareness of quality assurance systems from the clients and
students who benefit from career guidance. This means that end uses are rarely driving the
quality of career guidance through making active market choices.
Scotland
Scotland is a part of the UK and shares some systems and approaches in common with England
and the other UK countries. However, Scotland has always had a distinct education and
qualification system from England. Since political devolution in 1997 the Scottish career
guidance system has become increasingly distinct from England’s system as the two countries
have pursued distinct policies.
The creation of Skills Development Scotland in 2008 marked an important point in the
evolution of the careers system in Scotland. This new service brought together Careers
Scotland, elements of Scottish Enterprise's skills function, elements of Highlands & Islands
Enterprise, the Scottish University for Industry (learndirect Scotland, learndirect Scotland for
business, ILA Scotland and The Big Plus), training for work, Skillseekers and the Modern
Apprenticeships system. The creation of a comprehensive skills and careers agency has had an
important influence on quality in the career guidance system in the country. The fact that Skills
Development Scotland is able to exert a strategic influence on the career guidance system as
well as having direct responsibility for a large proportion of delivery, especially when
combined with the organisations proximity to policymakers, means that it is able to drive the
national understanding of quality.
28
Higher education and the career guidance provided in the public employment service
and wider welfare to work services sit outside of the purview of Skills Development Scotland.
The welfare to work area has recently been devolved from the UK level to Scottish government.
Although Skills Development Scotland’s internal policies and partnership activities
imply a number informal benchmarks for what constitutes quality careers provision, this is not
backed up by a formal national framework on quality in career guidance which covers all
providers of guidance. Various policy documents have signalled Scottish Government’s
commitment to a high-quality career guidance system (e.g. Scottish Government, 2011; 2014)
and led to the further definition of quality. But, as of yet, these have not been drawn together
into a single all-age, all-stage national quality framework. The countries career education,
information, advice and guidance strategy is due to be refreshed in 2019 and so this will likely
lead to further developments of the system described in this section.
Practice in the domains of quality
Policy. Scottish Government has introduced a National Performance Framework
12
which
offers citizens an easy way to monitor the performance of Scotland against defined outcomes
in key policy areas including children and young people, the economy, fair work and business,
communities, education and policy. Beneath this top-level framework there are a range of other
national quality monitoring and assurance tools. Within education the National Improvement
Framework for Scottish Education (Scottish Government, 2016a) includes a number of top-
level measures on the performance of Skills Development Scotland and the wider career
guidance system.
The National Performance Framework is illustrative of the way Scottish Governments
aims to create integrated policy. Consequently, career guidance rarely emerges as a distinct
policy area and it is more typical for wider education, employment and skills policies to include
some elements that apply to, or impact on career guidance. In such cases the career guidance
elements of policies are rarely monitored or evaluated as distinct elements. A recent example
can be seen in The Wood Commission (Commission for Developing Scotland’s Young
Workforce, 2014) which recommended a series of initiatives around developing the young
12
See https://nationalperformance.gov.scot/.
29
workforce many of which were bound up with career guidance provision. These were accepted
by Scottish Government and brought into policy (Scottish Government, 2014). They have
subsequently been monitored and evaluated through a series of reports which include some
high-level evaluation of the quality of career guidance provision in the country (Education
Scotland, 2016; Scottish Government, 2015, 2016b, 2017).
In addition to formal evaluation and review processes such as those established around
the implementation of the Wood Commission, policy initiatives around education, employment
and skills receive scrutiny in parliamentary committees (usually the Education and Skills
Committee). However, again career guidance is typically addressed as an embedded feature of
provision rather than as the primary focus of inquiry.
Skills Development Scotland, as the primary delivery agency, for career guidance
produces an annual report which sets out its main activities and achievements (e.g. Skills
Development Scotland, 2018a). This provides a clear basis for the activities of the organisation
to be monitored and held to public account.
Organisations. Most career guidance activities in schools are delivered by Skills Development
Scotland and governed by the organisations’ internal quality assurance processes. These
include complaints and feedback procedures and internal evaluation processes. A key process
adopted by Skills Development Scotland is its Business Excellence Framework which all local
teams are required to self- assess themselves against every two years. This leads to the creation
of a continuous improvement action plan which is then used to help manage the development
of that team and to monitor the improvement of quality across the organisation.
In addition, SDS is inspected by Education Scotland on an area by area basis. The
approach to review is set out in formal document and backed up by guidance for external
reviewers (Education Scotland, 2018a; 2018b). These reviews are focused around a series of
key questions as follows.
• How well are customers progressing and achieving relevant, high quality outcomes?
• How well does the organisation meet the needs of its stakeholders?
• How good is the delivery of key services?
• How good is the management of service delivery?
• How good is the strategic leadership?
30
• Does the service have the capacity to improve further?
Local services are reviewed every six years through a robust five-day inspection. This is then
followed up 18 months later by Education Scotland to ensure that recommendations have been
put into practice. Review teams are typically comprised of professional inspectors but may also
co-opt career guidance specialists where appropriate. In addition to detailed formative feedback
services are provided with a summative grades against each of the key questions on a six point
scale (excellent; very good; good; satisfactory; weak; and unsatisfactory). Reports are made
publicly available on the Education Scotland website.
13
Most higher education institutions use the matrix Standard and other similar quality
approaches to English higher education providers (see the section on England).
Within the vocational education system, Skills Development Scotland play an
important role in delivering career guidance and disseminating good practice. This is
supplemented by the work of the College Development Network which provides some advisory
resources on career guidance within colleges and also runs a practice enhancement network for
college guidance.
14
Process. As part of their inspection of career guidance provision Education Scotland undertake
observations in schools and careers centres of one-to-one career counselling
15
, group work and
other common career guidance activities.
Within Skills Development Scotland there is a requirement for observation of practice
to take place against the organisations’ observation framework. Observations are undertaken
by both peers and managers as part of performance management processes. Practitioners also
have regular circles of peer support where practice is discussed and ideas for improvement are
suggested. Practitioners are also encouraged to engage in structured self-reflection.
13
See https://education.gov.scot/other-sectors.
14
See https://www.cdn.ac.uk/networks-projects/guidance-development-network/ for further information on the
College Development Network Guidance Network.
15
Usually described in Scotland as ‘coaching guidance or career coaching’.
31
People. The overarching framework for professional qualification is common with England
and overseen by the Career Development Institute (CDI) as the professional association.
16
This
includes adherence to the national occupational standard, recognised qualifications endorsed
by the CDI and adoption of the CDI’s code of ethics.
A key difference from England is the requirement set by Skills Development Scotland
for all careers advisers to hold postgraduate level qualifications and for paraprofessional staff
to hold relevant vocational level qualifications. This requirement serves to clearly establish
what the required level for professional practice is and to incentivise the careers workforce to
acquire this level of skill if they want to work within Skills Development Scotland. Staff
working for Skills Development Scotland are also expected to complete a minimum of 21 hours
of continuing professional development every year.
There is no formal training or qualification requirement for teachers who are involved
in career education in schools. However, Skills Development Scotland have developed a suite
of optional self-study modules to support the continuing professional development of teachers
who are involved in career education. This is supported with lesson plans and resources which
can be accessed by the organisation’s website.
Careers advisers working in higher education will also typically hold relevant
postgraduate qualifications although there is some more flexibility about this within this sector.
Outside of Skills Development Scotland and higher education there is no requirement to hold
a professional qualification meaning that practitioners in the third sector are far more mixed in
terms of their qualifications and those in the welfare to work sector are unlikely to hold
equivalent qualifications.
Outputs and outcomes. Scotland has established a career management skills framework
which helps to clarify the expected outcomes of career guidance (Career Development
Scotland, 2012). The CMS framework underpins the countries career education standard
(Education Scotland, Skills Development Scotland & Scottish Government, 2015) and is also
used to underpin other service development.
16
This is discussed in more detail in the section on England. See the Careers Development Institute’s websites for
resources on professional qualifications (https://www.thecdi.net/GettingQualified) and professional registration
(https://www.thecdi.net/Professional-Register-).
32
The career education standard is accompanied by a work placement standard
(Education Scotland, 2015). Taken together these documents provide some guidance on
process, but clearly define the outputs and outcomes that young people can expect through their
participation in career guidance activities. These are framed in terms of an entitlement for
young people and other key stakeholder groups (parents, schools and employers) and
accompanied with a series of expectations about what different stakeholders are required to
contribute to these activities. Skills Development Scotland include the delivery of these
standards in the partnership agreements that they establish with schools. These standards are
expected to inform provision and are inspected as part of Education Scotland’s wider
inspections of schools and other activities. Although the CMS frameworks and the associated
standards define the expected outcomes for students, these are not usually formally assessed in
the way that learning outcomes for other subjects are.
The CMS framework was developed alongside the implementation of a new curriculum
(Curriculum for Excellence) that seeks to create a more inter-disciplinary and life-relevant form
of learning within Scotland’s schools. The importance of career education to this is
acknowledged in some policy and curriculum documents e.g. Scottish Government (2009).
However, the implementation of Curriculum for Excellence has been problematic for a range
of reasons that are largely outside of the scope of this paper (see Priestley & Drew, 2017), albeit
instructive for countries considering major change to their curriculum. This has meant that in
practice the implementation of career education through Curriculum for Excellence has often
not lived up to the potential that is offered by the new curriculum.
There is also an interest in destinations data as a measure of the outcomes of career
guidance. In higher education destinations surveys are used in the same way as in England.
Outside of higher education career guidance is also expected to have an influence on
destinations with a strong focus on reducing unemployment and the level of young people who
are not in education, employment or training (NEET). There is strong political pressure on
Skills Development Scotland to manage NEET levels. A recent innovation has been the
development of a new youth participation measure which looks at young people’s education
and employment status over time rather than just at a single census point (Skills Development
Scotland, 2018b). This provides a constant metric on which Skills Development Scotland
report annually. This is also supported by the creation of the 16+ Data Hub (Skills Development
Scotland, 2018c) which allows for data sharing between different government departments and
33
agencies to form a more complete picture of the issues experienced by young people in
transitioning to the labour market.
Users. Skills Development Scotland regularly conducts research on user needs and seek
feedback from users of its services. The organisation has a dedicated evaluation and research
team who lead on this work. User perspectives are gathered through regular evaluation
processes embedded into the organisations’ operations (e.g. (online) feedback forms with
school students, unemployed adults and users of face-to-face and online services. The
organisation also conducts research activities such as its annual survey of 16-19 year-old
students, focus groups with adult clients and an annual survey of Head Teachers. Skills
Development Scotland are also able to analyse data that is gathered through the organisations’
website My World of Work.
17
Education Scotland inspections of career guidance also involve actively seeking the
perspectives of a wide variety of user groups, typically through focus groups.
Within higher education similar systems exist, as in England, and include annual
student satisfaction survey, but career guidance forms a very small part of this.
Approaches to quality assurance
The definition and enhancement of quality in career guidance in Scotland is based around the
strong link that exists between Skills Development Scotland, as the dominant provider, and
Scottish Government. Strong policy support and a commitment to professionalism in practice
mean that the country has a highly developed approach to ensuring quality. This is further
enhanced by role of Education Scotland as a body driving improvement across the education
sector and directly involved in quality assuring careers provision through inspections. Taken
together this suggests that the regulatory approach is strongest in Scotland.
The approach to quality assurance outlined above is stronger in the education sector
than it is in career guidance that exists within the employment and welfare to work sectors.
However, it is possible that the devolution of these areas to Scottish Government may allow
them to be brought into the dominant quality approach that exists in the country in the future.
17
My World of Work is available at https://www.myworldofwork.co.uk/.
34
South Korea
South Korea has had some career guidance practice, particularly in the education system, since
the 1950s (Lee, 2017). Until the late 1990s career guidance in the country was limited, but
following an economic crisis in 1998 and a subsequent period of reform, interest and
investment in career guidance began to grow (Koh & Chapman, 2013; Yang, Lee, & Ahn,
2012; Yoon & Pyun, 2018). The passing of the Career Education Act (2015) instituted a formal
public career guidance system for the country and created the National Career Development
Centre to drive the implementation of this new system (ICCDPP, 2017b).
Recent reforms have mainly focused on career guidance within the compulsory
education systems, but career guidance can also be found in higher education and in a network
of local career and labour market centres which are overseen by the Ministry of Labour.
Practice in the domains of quality
Policy. The Career Education Act specifies that the career guidance policy should be reviewed
every five years and its focus and aims revised in order to reflect educational and social change.
The Act also include research and evaluation as a clear part of the implementation of the
countries career guidance system. The National Career Development Centre based within the
Korea Research Institute for Vocational Education and Training (KRIVET) has lead
responsibility for this (ICCDPP, 2017c). One key activity is an annual survey of career
education with students and teachers every year. The survey results provide data which allows
for ongoing monitoring of the implementation of the Act and the career guidance policy.
Organisation. Most career guidance is provided by existing educational providers (schools,
VET colleges, universities etc.). These organisations have pre-existing quality assurance
processes and no additional quality assurance is undertaken at the organisational level to ensure
that these organisations are competent to deliver career guidance.
Schools are required to have a Dedicated Career Teacher and to deliver Careers and
Occupations as a subject within the National Curriculum. Within schools there is an annual
award process run by the Ministry of Education and the National Career Development Centre
which recognises best practice in career development and awards schools with a
35
commendation. This process is designed to recognise the best schools rather that provide a
minimum standard and quality assure to it.
Some dedicated funding has been allocated to universities to establish career centres by
the Ministry of Labour (Yang, Lee, & Ahn, 2012). However, despite national funding the
higher education careers services remain largely autonomous with no agreed upon definition
of quality or standardised quality assurance processes. Recently, the Ministry of Education has
added whether career guidance is provided to the university evaluation index. This measn that
universities are now assessed on whether they have the right people, services and programs to
provide a quality career guidance service. The results are used as a basis for judging
universities' financial support from the Ministry of Education. This has driven a growth in the
delivery of career guidance services in the higher education sector.
Process. The current policy sets out a detailed curriculum framework that specifies how career
guidance should be taught in the South Korean compulsory education system. This is overseen
by the National Curriculum Committee under the Ministry of Education which ensures that all
curricula are compliant with the Career Education Act and framework.
Clarity about the delivery of career guidance is lower outside of the compulsory
education system. Despite policy and economic imperatives for stronger career education
within higher education, there is still a lack of clarity about how this is best delivered. This has
led to calls for the establishment of clearer guidance for careers work in higher education
(Drolet & Anderson, 2016).
People. Career guidance in the education system can be only provided by a Dedicated Career
Teacher. This post is required to be appointed within each school and the skills and duties of
the post are specified through the Enforcement Regulations of the Teacher Qualification Test.
Dedicated Career Teacher’s must be a qualified teacher and also to have completed an
additional training programme (lasting around 600 hours) (Yoon & Pyun, 2018). This training
is focused on the implementation of the career education frameworks associated with the
Career Education Act and is delivered by existing teacher training organisations in line with a
national training specification set out by the National Career Development Centre. Additional
professional development is provided by the professional association (the Association of
Career Education). The professional association is also an important stakeholder which is
36
consulted as part of policy development processes. However, the professional association does
not have a direct role in the registration nor accreditation of professionals.
Career guidance in higher education is less clearly regulated than that in schools.
Research has found that qualifications and professional standards within this sector are mixed
with many staff being transferred into the careers service from other university functions rather
than recruited as specialists (Ahn, 2014; Yang, Lee, & Ahn, 2012).
Career guidance outside of the education systems was been characterised by a wide
array of job titles (Koh & Chapman, 2013) and there has historically been weak professional
regulation for career guidance and other counselling professionals (Lee, 2017). This has led a
range of problems and malpractices. However, addressing this was difficult due to large
number of professional bodies as well as divisions between public and private sector practice.
Taken together this led to a fragmented professional and delivery infrastructure.
In recent years there has been an attempt to tighten up regulation in careers work in the
labour market. There have been various attempts to create a more formal licensing system, such
as in 2008 when the government formally recognised the role of ‘job counsellors’ and then set
out minimum requirements (in 2010) for those individuals who are employed in the public
employment service (Yoon & Pyun, 2018). This was then followed up with regulation through
the Employment Security Act in 2015 which regulated the qualifications and professionalism
of those working in private employment services (Yoon & Pyun, 2018). More recently, in 2017
multiple professional bodies have come together to create a unified licensing system. This has
also been accompanied by a campaign for counselling, including career guidance, to become a
legally regulated profession (Lee, 2017). This has aligned well with wider reforms to the South
Korean skills system (the development of the National Competency Standards) which have
resulted in the development of new licensing systems for careers professions in the country
(Yoon & Pyun, 2018).
Outputs or outcomes. The career education framework specifies the outcomes that learners
can expect from participating in career guidance. This is focused around four areas: self-
awareness and social skills; understanding the changing world of work; career exploration; and
career design and planning. These four areas are described as the career education goals and
are followed by every level of the education system. It is expected that this curriculum will
37
lead to individuals who are able to solve their own career problems and successfully develop
their careers once they leave the education system.
The career management skills defined by the career education framework are currently
more clearly embedded in the school system than they are in wider society. The National Career
Development Centre is currently working to extend engagement with these outcomes across
different sectors. Notably, work is currently underway in implementing career exploration
skills within the higher education system.
Within higher education the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology publishes
the employment statistics of different universities. This has been used to exert pressure on
universities to establish or expand career development services (Yang, Lee, & Ahn, 2012).
However, this has led to concerns that universities view career guidance solely as an
employment service. To counter-balance the focus on employment outcomes some actors have
argued that there is also a need to measure the development of career development
competencies to ensure a more complete measure of the outcomes of career guidance.
Users. The National Career Development Centre conducts several surveys and other research
projects to capture the experience of users and other stakeholders. These are then used to inform
policy and practice through reports and other forms of feedback.
Approaches to quality
The approach to the quality assurance of career guidance in South Korea is regulatory in nature
and driven by government. Within the education system The National Career Development
Centre and KRIVET are key intermediaries between policy and practice and provide a lot of
detail and support for implementation of policies. Their work can generally be described as
being more advisory in nature and aimed at supporting educators to implement the Career
Education Act. Outside of the education system there have been some recent moves to increase
the regulation of professional practice, but there is less advisory support for professionalisation
within this sector.
38
III. Key themes in international practice
Taken together the case studies presented in chapter II provide a rich picture of how different
countries address issues of quality assurance in career guidance. This section will begin by
synthesising the key ideas and practices that emerged in each of the domains of quality. It will
then move on to draw out some broader findings.
Techniques used in the domains of quality
The previous chapter explored the six case studies against Hooley and Rice’s (2018) domains
of quality. In this section I draw together the key techniques used within each domain.
Policy
Policy is one of the weakest domains in terms of quality assurance. While all case study
countries develop career guidance policy, there a mixed picture in terms of how these policies
are monitored, evaluated and quality assured. Approaches utilised include: committing to a
regular review of career guidance policy (South Korea); establishing research and evaluation
agencies or departments to monitor and support the implementation of career guidance policy
(Scotland, South Korea); commissioning independent evaluations of policy (Australia,
England, Germany, the Netherlands, Scotland); monitoring policy implementation against key
indicators (England, the Netherlands, Scotland); scrutinising career guidance policies in public
and parliamentary committees (England, Scotland); providing organisations and resources to
support the translation of policy into practice (the Netherlands); and the publication of an
annual report on the implementation and impact of career guidance policy (the Netherlands;
Scotland).
Organisation
The organisations that deliver career guidance are often multi-function with career guidance
offered as a secondary function. However, in all countries there are also organisations where
the delivery of career guidance is their primary function. Establishing quality assurance
systems that can work with a variety of different types of organisations with different
relationships to career guidance is one of the key challenges for quality systems as will be
discussed in the next section of this chapter.
39
Case study countries deploy a range of strategies to quality assure organisations. A key
approach that is used within all organisations to some extent is the existence of internal quality
assurance procedures. In some cases these can be highly developed (e.g. in the public
employment service in Germany or Skills Development Scotland) while in others they are more
minimal. These internal approaches are particularly important when a substantial proportion of
the career guidance in the country is delivered by a large public body or other kind of monopoly
provider.
Other strategies which are used to create greater alignment in quality between
organisations include providing organisations with resources and tools for benchmarking their
provision (Australia, England, Germany, the Netherlands, Scotland); monitoring the
performance of organisations in the delivery of career guidance against a number of key agreed
criteria or outcomes (Australia, England); formal inspection of career guidance provision by
an external inspectorate (England, Scotland); including career guidance in wider inspections
and quality assurance processes (England, the Netherlands); awarding quality marks to
organisations that are judged to be fit to deliver career guidance, sometimes linked to being
able to bid for government contracts (England, Germany, the Netherlands); awarding quality
marks that denote the outstanding delivery of career guidance (England, South Korea); and
providing dedicated funding to help establish career guidance within new organisations or
develop existing organisations provision (South Korea).
Process
The quality assurance of career guidance processes can be challenging as it requires detailed
attention to the activity itself rather than the use of proxies to ascertain whether quality is
present. As with the organisational domain many of the case studies suggested that there were
a range of internal and informal processes such as manager or peer observation or supervision
that attend to the quality of career guidance processes. Again, these internal processes are
particularly important when a single organisation is responsible for a large proportion of career
guidance in the country.
Where quality assurance is formally addressed to processes it takes the form of the
provision of guidance on processes (Australia, England, South Korea), the provision of
standardised resources or career assessments (the Netherlands) or observation as part of
inspections (the Netherlands, Scotland).
40
People
The people domain is the most developed in most of the case study countries. It is also the area
that has received the most attention in the wider literature. For example, a recent and highly
useful supplementary resource to the materials presented in this report is Yoon et al.’s (2018)
International Practices of Career Services, Credentials and Training which explores issues of
training, professionalisation and professional credentials in a wider range of countries.
The people domain has received the most focus in part because it has been strongly
bound up with wider movements to professionalise the career development field. One of the
consequences of this is that the profession and professional bodies then have a strong self-
interest in advancing this approach to quality as it places the profession at the heart of this
debate and increases its legitimacy.
Case study countries use the following approaches to quality assure the people domain:
establishing professional and ethical standards (Australia, England, Germany, the Netherlands,
Scotland); specifying the approved list of qualifications that can lead to professionals status
(Australia, England, the Netherlands, Scotland, South Korea); providing opportunities for
continuing professional development (Australia, England, Germany, the Netherlands,
Scotland, South Korea); creating a register of professionals to allow post-qualification conduct
to be regulated (Australia, England, the Netherlands, Scotland, South Korea); and linking
professional status to employment in certain roles (Australia, the Netherlands, Scotland) or to
access to government funding (Australia, Germany).
Outputs or outcomes
The outputs and outcomes domain focuses on approaches which seek to verify quality based
on what comes out of the career guidance process. In order to do this it is necessary to first
define what a likely or desired outcome is and then to measure whether such an outcome takes
place. While there is some variation most of the countries identify both learning outcomes
(based around the acquisition of career management skills) and progression outcomes (based
on the achievement of employment or educational destinations).
Key approaches that are used by countries to quality assure the outcome dimension are:
identifying skills frameworks to describe the anticipated outcomes of career guidance
41
(Australia, the Netherlands, Scotland, South Korean); measuring student destinations after they
leave education (England, the Netherlands, Scotland, South Korea); and using payment-by-
results systems linked to either career management skills or destinations (Australia, England).
Users
The final domain is concerned with using the experience and perspectives of the users of career
guidance services as a definition and measurement of quality. Countries are using a variety of
techniques to quality assure in the user domain. These include: monitoring usage and user
satisfaction with services (Australia, England; the Netherlands, Scotland); conducting large
scale follow up surveys (Australia, England and Scotland); conducting research into user needs
and perspectives (Germany, Scotland, South Korea); requiring customer feedback and
recommendation in the accreditation of careers professionals (the Netherlands); involving
student representative bodies in the development of career guidance policies (the Netherlands);
and using payment-by-results systems which link payment to customer satisfaction levels
(England).
Key findings
The previous section of this chapter demonstrates that all of the quality domains are in use in
at least some of the countries and that different countries build their quality system in different
ways by emphasising the different domains. In each country, different domains and approaches
are used to achieve similar objectives. So, in Australia the focus is strongly on the people
domain with professionalisation viewed as a guarantor of quality provision, whilst in England
the focus is more clearly on quality assurance at the organisational level.
Across the case studies the most common focus is on the people domain. The countries
have all developed a professionalisation agenda and an approach to defining and regulating
who can be seen as a professional. After the people domain the next most common approaches
are regulating organisations e.g. through the matrix Standard or the Quality in Careers Standard
in England or seeking to measure the outputs and outcomes through the definition of career
management skills and the measurement of satisfaction and progression (employment and
learning) outcomes. In some cased (England, Australia and the Netherlands) these outcomes
can be linked to government payments to the provider.
42
In this section I will move on to draw out some broader over-arching findings which I
will discuss under the following headings.: (1) fungibility (2) decentralisation; (3) embedded
systems (4) how systems develop; (5) implementation and governance.
Fungibility
Each country has assembled its own patchwork of quality approaches. In most cases
some of the domains of quality are ignored or only weakly evident. While there appear to be
some advantages in attending to multiple domains (for example ensuring that professionals are
appropriately qualified and observing how they do their job in practice), it is less clear that the
benefits associated with quality assurance stack up the more domains you attend to. Quality
assurance might more accurately be thought of as fungible (or inter-changeable) where the
benefits of different approaches can be achieved through multiple means. Fungibility is a term
borrowed from economics and describes the ability of a good or asset to be interchanged with
other individual goods or assets. Assets that are fungible are exchangeable for each other and
simplify the exchange and trade processes, as fungibility implies equal value between the
assets.
Quality in career guidance can therefore be said to be fungible because the benefits that
can be gained from quality assurance can be achieved by a range of different means. A
technique within one domain can be swapped for a different technique within a different
domain to achieve a similar outcome. So, an organisation that is staffed by qualified
professionals is likely to exhibit many of the features of a quality organisation. Similarly, the
quality assurance of processes or outcomes will place demands on the people who do the job,
which will lead them to seek professional development. A key decision is therefore how to
ensure that the overall quality system is both parsimonious and that it offers mechanisms to
enhance quality in the desired areas.
Decentralisation
No country has developed a single framework through which the quality of career guidance
across all sectors, jurisdictions and domains is quality assured. This is particularly challenging
in federal countries, but the divisions that exist between career guidance practice across
different sectors also drive decentralisations. No country has really solved this, but Scotland as
a small state with a strong central infrastructure (Skills Development Scotland) offers one
43
model for a highly coherent national system, whilst South Korea as a new adopter of career
guidance with a strongly interventionist state offers another.
It is important to recognise that the lack of a single national quality system does not
mean that quality assurance is absent in the other case study countries. Many countries have a
huge array of different approaches that they use to quality assure different aspects of their
countries career guidance systems. The case study countries all have an approach to quality
assurance, with each emphasising different domains of quality and each has a different balance
between the regulatory, advisory, organic and competitive approaches to managing quality.
Norway has been working to develop a single framework for quality in career guidance
and so this has framed the line of enquiry in this study. The finding that no other country has
been able to deliver this may therefore be concerning. However, it is important to recognise
that the countries in the case studies were not necessarily seeking this aim. Many of the
participants in this research see value in devolved and decentred approaches to quality
assurance that allow sectors, jurisdictions or even individual providers or professionals to
define their own sense of what constitutes quality. As ever there is a balance to be struck
between more centralist systems (like Scotland and South Korea) and more decentred systems
(like Germany and Australia). However, even where quality assurance is devolved, there are
still important decisions about what lines the devolution should be organised on with
geographical/juristicational and departmental/sectoral being two of the most common ways to
devolve responsibility for quality.
Embedded systems
A key challenge in all countries is the fact that career guidance is embedded in wider systems
which often have their own quality assurance processes. This is particularly the case for the
school system which often has well established systems of inspection and quality assurance
that are not primarily focused on career guidance. However, the same issue can also be found
to a lesser extent in the VET system, higher education and the public employment system.
The embedded nature of career guidance means that a key design question is therefore
whether it is better to create bespoke quality assurance systems for career guidance or to embed
an awareness of career guidance in wider systems. The more a country moves towards
embedded approaches the more challenging it is to create cross-sectoral and lifelong
44
frameworks for quality in career guidance. Embedded approaches to quality assurance have the
positive effect of making attending to quality in career guidance more central to an
organisations’ main activities. However, they can also reduce the amount of time devoted to
career guidance in quality assurance processes.
How systems develop
Norway is in a unique position of being able to design a career guidance system with an almost
clean sheet. Of the case studies in this research only South Korea offers a comparable example.
All of the other countries discussed have much more developed systems which have existed
for a long period and have often been through a variety of ups and downs in terms of policy
support and funding. In all of these cases the quality system could be more accurately have
been said to have evolved rather than having been designed.
South Korea, offers an important example for Norway as it shows how a system can be
quickly established. In this case the establishment of a robust policy framework with clear
requirements is critical to making rapid progress. The identification of Krivet as a driver of
policy implementation has also been critical as has the establishment of the National Career
Development Centre within Krivet as a centre for expertise. These initiatives align strongly
with the role that Skills Norway has taken.
In all other countries the quality system has developed more clearly as part of political
debates around the nature, importance and future of career guidance. In such cases quality
assurance is sometimes used by the government to seek to control the profession and the
delivery of public services. This is the case England with the matrix Standard. Alternatively,
professional associations and other careers sector bodies have viewed developing a quality
system as part of an attempt to increase the status of the profession and career guidance as an
activity (to some extent this is true of all of the case study countries).
While the existence of multiple stakeholders seeking to define and influence quality
can mitigate against the coherence of the system, it often leads to richer frameworks for quality
that are capable of sustaining beyond a particular policy agenda. Nonetheless, policy support
is very useful in establishing new quality frameworks and in ensuring their effective
implementation. Where policy support is not evident progress is often slow and those who
choose to stand outside quality frameworks can do so.
45
Implementation and governance
A quality system is not just a framework that can be documented and then assumed to be in
place. For example, Germany’s BeQu-Concept offered one of the best developed frameworks
in the case studies, but despite this, was weakly implemented and had limited impact on the
ground. In order to successfully influence practice a quality system needs to have the following
features.
Reasons to engage. Quality systems need a clear engagement strategy. Professionals and
organisations will not spontaneously adopt them without a clear reason. The main drivers of
engagement are (1) legal compliance; (2) providing access to funding; (3) governmental and
political encouragement; and (4) professional or sectoral good citizenship leading to a
movement within the careers field to align with the quality framework. Many participants also
talked about the way in which publicly understood quality marks could improve user
confidence and drive consumer decisions. However, there was not much evidence that such
market pressure was actually having an impact as public understanding of career guidance was
generally felt to be low.
In general, professionals and organisations engaged with quality systems either because they
had to, or at least were strongly encouraged by policy makers to do so, or because they had a
moral and political commitment to quality in their field. It is arguable that regulatory
approaches were more effective in yielding rapid change, but that more organic approaches led
by the careers profession or careers sector were more sustainable and capable of riding out
policy change.
Consequences for failing to engage. The flip side of having a clear reason to engage with
quality is having some consequences for failing to do so. This needs to include both sanctions
for failing to engage with the quality process (such as legal sanctions, loss of funding or naming
and shaming) and consequences for failing to meet the requirements of the quality framework
e.g. being struck off of the professional register, made publicly accountable or served with a
notice to improve. Where no systems exist to ensure compliance, the quality framework can
easily be ignored, misinterpreted and misused.
Advocacy and support. Quality systems need advocates who can argue for their value and
support individuals and organisations to engage. Such advocacy organisations can be dedicated
46
to this purpose such as the National Career Development Centre in South Korea or nfb in
Germany. Alternatively advocacy can come from a wider agency such as Skills Development
Scotland which leads by example and works closely with other elements of the education
system to improve their engagement in quality; from a professional association or sectoral body
like the CDI in the UK, Noloc in the Netherlands or CICA in Australia; or from a range of
market players with business interests in advancing the position of a quality mark such the
Quality in Careers Standard and matrix Standard providers in England and similar private
sector certification bodies in Germany.
Such advocacy bodies have a dual role to build the case for engagement and to provide
resources and support that make engagement more straightforward. In some, but not all, cases
these bodies are also involved in accrediting and certifying quality and policing infractions and
malpractice.
Governance. Finally, it is important that quality standards have clear governance. Quality is
often a slippery concept which needs constant refinement as it is challenged and issues exposed
in practice. Where quality systems have existed for a long period of time they have often gone
through multiple revisions (e.g. CICA standards in Australia, matrix Standard in England).
I have already highlighted the challenges associated with decentred quality systems. In
many countries initiatives have emerged to try and address this by fusing together multiple pre-
existing quality standards, often associated with different sectors or jurisdictions (England,
Australia, Germany, the Netherlands). In all cases the success of any such initiatives is
essentially a governance question, with issues of control of the future of the quality standard
and its legitimacy at stake.
There are a range of approaches that exist for governing quality systems. One approach
is for the quality system to be viewed as an instrument of public policy and for its governance
to sit with the government. This is essentially the approach that is emphasised in Scotland and
South Korea. An alternative is for the quality system to be governed by either the professional
association or a sector body (as is emphasised in Australia and Germany). All of the countries
use some kind of a mix between these different governance strategies, with England combining
both in fairly equal measure, due in part to its highly complex and fragmented career guidance
system.
47
IV. Questions for Norway
In this final section I will try and draw out some of the key questions that are raised by this
research for the future development of practice in Norway.
What are the aims of Norway’s quality system for career guidance? The case studies show
that quality frameworks can be used to achieve a wide range of different ends and objectives.
At present it is not fully clear what the problem is that Norway’s quality system will solve. It
will be important to clarify this further as the system develops as the objectives that are set will
have a range of key design implications?
Is it realistic to create a single, lifelong, national quality approach? All of the case study
countries have multiple quality systems rather than a single, lifelong, national approach. They
are organised by local jurisdiction and by sector. As the Norwegian system develops it will
have to consider how important maintaining the single, lifelong and national approach is as
there are likely to be tensions that emerge between such a comprehensive approach and making
rapid progress within a single sector or jurisdiction. For example, is it more important to
develop a quality system that works in the school system or to make sure that quality systems
in schools, universities and the public employment service are well aligned?
How should the career guidance quality system relate to wider, existing quality systems?
It is important to strike the right balance between engaging with existing quality systems and
developing new systems dedicated to the quality assurance of career guidance. Where existing
quality systems exist within the education and employment system it may be possible to adapt
them and insert elements that help to assure quality in career guidance. However, such
approaches are likely to offer limited space to career guidance. On the other hand the
development of bespoke career guidance systems are likely to offer more precision and detail
in quality assuring career guidance, but may be more difficult to implement within systems that
already have a wider quality assurance framework.
Who should own the quality system or framework? The case study countries reveal a range
of possibilities about how quality systems can be governed. At one end of the spectrum are
approaches that are owned by the profession and at the other end are approaches that are owned
by the state. In the middle, particularly in more corporatist countries, there are a range of
mechanisms that exist to allow for joint ownership by multiple stakeholders. At present Skills
48
Norway effectively owns the nascent Norwegian system with consultative input from key
stakeholders, a key question is whether ownership needs to be shifted as the system develops.
What governance structure is needed for the quality system? Quality is both contentious
and in continual evolution. Because of this it is important that a governance structure is
developed to allow the system to change and develop and for disagreements to be resolved.
Such governance structures will need appropriate resourcing to allow for development, review
and the resolution of difficulties. It will also need legitimacy in the eyes of both the government
and the profession. At present Skills Norway is responsible for governance, but it is important
to consider whether this is the right structure going forwards and how the professional
association and other voices of the profession along with voices of users could be involved in
future governance.
How will the quality system be implemented? Quality needs to be understood as a process
that is ongoing rather than a single framework. The construction of a published framework or
approach is only the start of the process. The case studies reveal that the implementation of the
quality system will be extremely challenging. There are a wide range of roles that will be
critical to implementation which will include raising awareness, the provision of support and
challenge and the policing of adherence to the system. Once the quality system is designed it
will be important for Skill Norway to develop a detailed implementation plan and to consider
what resources are required to make it happen.
What is the role of the county careers centres in the implementation plan? The
implementation of a quality system requires an infrastructure. The county career centres are at
the heart of the Norwegian career guidance system. This raises the question of both how the
career centres should be quality assured and what role should they play in the quality assurance
of other organisations? For example, should the careers centres be charged with supporting the
development of quality in all relevant organisations in their jurisdiction and how far should
they be transformed into an inspectorate or quality assurance agency?
What data is currently monitored and what new forms of monitoring are needed? Quality
assurance is closely intertwined with the collection and analysis of data. As the quality system
in Norway takes shape it is important to review what data is currently collected and to consider
what additional monitoring is required.
49
What information about quality should be made public? An important rationale for
developing a quality system and quality assurance mechanisms is to increase public confidence
in the career guidance system. This raises the question about how far summative judgements
about the quality of different aspects of the career guidance system should be made public.
Should people know when they are accessing sub-standard or excellent provision and what
should they be expected to do with such information? At the macro level should Skills Norway
be expected to publish an annual report on the progress of the career guidance policy and the
quality of delivery?
How far can destination measures be seen as a useful measure of the quality of career
guidance? The focus on outcomes is appealing to policy makers as it seems to offer a simple
and meaningful measure. In practice linking career guidance interventions (or indeed any other
kind of intervention) to destinations can be very difficult? Furthermore, there are important
definitional questions about what constitutes a good and bad destination and whether the
system should encourage the achievement of good outcomes or the avoidance of bad outcomes.
What is the role of the CMS framework in quality assurance? One of the areas of focus in
the current quality project in Norway has been the development of the career management skills
framework. However, as the case studies show this is easier to develop than it is to implement
and is very challenging to use as a tool of quality assurance. A key question is therefore how
far the CMS framework is expected to be able to define and evidence quality and how this will
be assessed, monitored and reported against.
50
V.Reflections
This project has drawn together the experiences of six countries in implementing quality
systems for career guidance. It has not focused in depth on the Norwegian career guidance
system, nor on the progress that has been made within the current project led by Skills Norway
to create a new quality system. However, it may be useful to conclude by offering a few
reflections on the direction that the Norwegian system should take. These reflections are
offered cautiously and are based on what seems to work effectively elsewhere and on some of
the issues and pitfalls raised through the research. Skills Norway and other actors in the
Norwegian system are free to make use of them or ignore them as they see fit.
Start by clarifying objectives. As I have discussed, quality in career guidance can be used to
describe a wide range of different things. It is important for Norway to be very clear on what
it is trying to achieve by implementing a quality system. Key objectives that it may be useful
to focus on include enhancing the user experience, maximising the impact of career guidance
on individuals’ work and ensuring some degree of consistency across the country and between
sectors.
Limit the number of domains that are addressed initially. The six domains are useful in
conceptualising the possibilities for a quality system. However, it is unwise to attempt to
implement initiatives across all of the domains simultaneously. The Norwegian system will
need to grow, develop and mature over time rather than be imposed overnight. At present the
bulk of the thinking about quality in Norway has focused on the people domain, through the
professionalisation agenda, and the output and outcomes domain, through the development of
a career management skills framework. These seem good places to start, but there may be value
in considering how the overall policy should be quality assured. Once these initiatives have
been implemented it will be important to consider what is not working well and where new
initiatives in different domains might be useful.
Build a system that will sustain. While support from government and public policy is essential
for the establishment of a quality system, there are dangers in tying quality processes too
closely to government agendas. There is value to both the sustainability and legitimacy of a
quality system if it is able to operate independently of government or at least to view
government as only one amongst a range of stakeholders in the system. Skills Norway’s status
51
as a directorate under the Ministry of Education and Research helps to ensure this, but there
would also be value in considering how wider stakeholders could be made more central to the
development and governance of the quality system.
Consider the role of professional bodies. Internationally careers professional associations
play a critical role in the development, implementation and operations of quality systems. Such
arrangements are particularly appropriate when considering initiatives within the people
domain, but can also extend beyond that. The relevant professional associations in Norway are
relatively weak at present, but there may be value in seeking to strengthen these as part of the
implementation of the quality system.
Continue to keep a lifelong focus, but recognise the need for sectoral focus and
prioritisation. The aspiration to build a lifelong, all-sector quality system in Norway should
be applauded. All of the countries studied reported variation and inconsistency between the
different sectors and it would be good if this could be averted. As the quality framework is
finalised it is important to test it with the full range of sectors. It is also important to recognise
that the challenges of implementation are likely to be particularly to each sector. There may be
a need to produce additional documentation and translation for each sector to ensure that the
framework is relevant and easy to use. This may also mean that there is a need to prioritise
where efforts should be directed during the first year of implementation, for example by
focusing on schools and the public employment service.
Implementation is at least as important as design. Most of the focus in Norway so far as
been around the design of elements of the quality system. As these come together it is important
to shift the focus towards implementation. There is a need to identify an infrastructure and
resources for the implementation of the quality system and then to ensure that this infrastructure
has sufficient authority to lead a wide range of other organisations in the adoption of the quality
framework. One option would be to view the careers centres as the quality champions in each
of the counties. This would require them to be given new resources and powers, for example
giving them the capacity and right to review career guidance provision in local schools and
colleges. If this approach were to be adopted it would also be important to have a national body,
most likely Skills Norway, overseeing and quality assuring the careers centres themselves.
52
References
Ahn, S. (2014). Status of career counselling services in Korean Universities. Available from
http://www.asiapacificcda.org/Korea.
Almeida, N., Marques, A., & Arulmani, G. (2014). Evaluation of the quality of career guidance
centers. In G. Arulmani, A. J. Bakshi, F. T. L. Leong, & A. Watts (Eds.), Handbook of
career development: International perspectives (pp. 659–670). New York, NY:
Springer.
Andrews, D. & Chubb, P. (2017). The Quality in Careers Standard and quality awards for
CEIAG in England: An updated brief history. The Quality in Careers Consortium.
Assessment Services Ltd. (2017). Matrix quality standard for information advice and guidance
services. Assessment Services Ltd.
Bell, J., Smith, M. & Bright, J.E.H. (2005). Measuring student self-efficacy to enhance school
to work processes: the development of a large-scale on-line survey instrument.
Managing and Leading, 11(2), 119-134.
Bimrose, J., Hughes, D., & Collins, A. (2006). Quality assurance mechanisms for information,
advice and guidance: A critical review. Coventry: Institute for Employment Research,
University of Warwick.
Bowes, L., Bysshe, S., Moreton, R., Howe, P., & Birkin, G. (2013). Evaluation of National
Careers Service partnership delivery. London: Department for Business, Innovation
and Skills.
Career Development Institute (CDI). (2018a). Introduction to the observation/self-reflection
process for career development interventions. Stourbridge: Career Development
Institute.
Career Development Institute (CDI). (2018b). Framework for careers, employability and
enterprise education. Stourbridge: Career Development Institute.
Career Industry Council of Australia (CICA). (2011). Professional standards for Australian
career development practitioners. Hawthorn, Victoria: CICA.
53
Career Industry Council of Australia (CICA). (2014). School career development service.
Benchmarking resource. Hawthorn, Victoria: CICA.
Career Industry Council of Australia (CICA). (2015). CICA Registration. Hawthorn, Victoria:
CICA.
Career Industry Council of Australia (CICA). (2017). Review of the professional standards for
Australian career development practitioners. Briefing paper 1. Hawthorn, Victoria:
CICA.
Careers Profession Task Force. (2010). Towards a strong careers profession. London:
Department for Education.
Cumming, L.M. (2011). Payment-by-outcome in welfare to work. London: Public Service
Trust.
Department for Education & Office for Students. (2018). Statistics: Higher education graduate
employment and earnings. Available from
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/statistics-higher-education-graduate-
employment-and-earnings.
Department for Education. (2017). Careers strategy: Making the most of everyone’s skills and
talents. London: Department for Education.
Department for Education. (2018a). Careers guidance and access for education and training
providers. London: Department for Education.
Department for Education. (2018b). Careers guidance. Guidance for further education
colleges and sixth form colleges. London: Department for Education.
Department for Education. (2018c). Destinations data. Good practice guide for schools.
London: Department for Education.
Drolet, C., & Anderson, C. (2016). A need for comprehensive career guidelines in Korean
higher education: The practice among two faculties. Australian Journal of Career
Development, 25(2), 69-77.
54
Education & Skills Funding Agency. (2018). Funding rules for the National Careers Service.
London: Education & Skills Funding Agency.
Education Scotland, Skills Development Scotland & Scottish Government. (2015). Developing
the young workforce. Career education standard (3-18). Livingston: Education
Scotland.
Education Scotland. (2015). Developing the young workforce. Work placement standard.
Livingston: Education Scotland.
Education Scotland. (2016). Quality and improvement in Scottish education 2012-2016.
Livingston: Education Scotland.
Education Scotland. (2018a). External quality arrangements for the review of career
information, advice and guidance services delivered by Skills Development Scotland.
Livingston: Education Scotland.
Education Scotland. (2018b). Guidance for external reviewers of career information, advice
and guidance delivered by Skills Development Scotland. Livingston: Education
Scotland.
Enabling Enterprise. (2018). The enterprise skills. Available from
http://enablingenterprise.org/about/skills.
Euroguidance. (2018a). Guidance system in Germany. Available from
https://www.euroguidance.eu/guidance-system-in-germany.
Euroguidance. (2018b). Guidance system in the in the Netherlands. Available from
https://www.euroguidance.eu/guidance-system-in-the-netherlands.
Gatsby Charitable Foundation. (2014). Good career guidance. London: Gatsby Charitable
Foundation.
Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). (2018a). Graduate data. Available from
https://www.hesa.ac.uk/data-and-analysis/graduates.
55
Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). (2018b). Graduate outcomes. Available from
https://www.graduateoutcomes.ac.uk/.
HM Treasury. (2018). The green book: Central government guidance on appraisal and
evaluation. London: HM Treasury.
Hooley, T. & Rice, S. (2018). Ensuring quality in career guidance: a critical review. British
Journal of Guidance and Counselling, online first. doi:
10.1080/03069885.2018.1480012.
Hughes, D. (2017). Careers work in England’s schools: politics, practices and prospects. British
Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 45(4), 427-440. doi:
10.1080/03069885.2017.1346234.
International Centre for Career Development and Public Policy (ICCDPP). (2017a). Germany:
Quality assurance for qualifications and career competencies in career guidance.
Available from http://iccdpp.org/germany-quality-assurance-qualifications-
competences-career-guidance/.
International Centre for Career Development and Public Policy (ICCDPP). (2017b). About
career education in Korea. Available from http://iccdpp2017.org/is-2017-in-
korea/about-career-education-in-korea/.
International Centre for Career Development and Public Policy (ICCDPP). (2017c). About
KRIVET. Available from http://iccdpp2017.org/is-2017-in-korea/about-krivet-career-
development-center/.
Ipsos MORI. (2018). National Careers Service: Customer satisfaction and progression annual
report. London: Ipsos MORI.
Klueger, M. (2015). Public employment services in Europe: Germany. Geneva: International
Labour Organisation.
Koh, I. & Chapman, V. (2013). Career counselling in South Korea: A synopsis of an emerging
profession. Available from
https://ncda.org/aws/NCDA/pt/sd/news_article/71728/_PARENT/OLDER_layout_det
ails/false.
56
Kuijpers, M. A., Schyns, B., & Scheerens, J. (2006). Career competencies for career success.
The Career Development Quarterly, 55(2), 168-178. doi: 10.1002/j.2161-
0045.2006.tb00011.x.
Lee, S.M. (2017). South Korea’s first counselling day. Available from
http://www.asiapacificcda.org/Korea.
Maze, M., Yoon, H.J., & Hutchison, B. (2018). Introduction. In Yoon, H. J., Hutchison, B.,
Maze, M., Pritchard, C., & Reiss, A. (Eds.). (2018). International practices of career
services, credentials, and training (pp.5-11). Broken Arrow, OK: National Career
Development Association.
McIlveen, P. & Alchin, C. (2017). Qualifications for Australian career development
practitioners. In Yoon, H., Hutchison, B., Maze, M., Pritchard, C., Reiss, A. (Eds.).
International practices of career services, credentials, and training. Broken Arrow,
OK. National Career Development Association.
McMahon, M. (2004). Scoping paper -Shaping a career development culture: Quality
standards, quality practice, quality outcomes. Canberra: Department of Education,
Science and Training.
Miles Morgan. (2005). National standards and accreditation of career practitioners project.
Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training.
National Audit Office. (2014). 16- to 18-year old participation in education and training.
London: National Audit Office.
National Guidance Forum in Education, Career and Employment (nfb). (2014). Career
guidance in the life course - Structures and service in Germany. Berlin: nfb.
National Guidance Forum in Education, Career and Employment (nfb)., & Research Group
Quality in Guidance at the Institute of Educational Science of the Ruprecht-Karls-
Heidelberg University (2014/2016). The BeQu Concept for quality development in
career guidance and counselling: The BeQu quality standards and competence profile.
Berlin: nfb & University of Heidelberg.
NCVER. (2014). Student outcomes. Adelaide: NCVER.
57
NSW Government. (2016). School to work programme. 2016 overview. Sydney: NSW
Government.
Ofsted. (2015). The common inspection framework: Education, skills and early years.
Manchester: Ofsted.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2014a). OECD Skills
Strategy Diagnostic Report. Norway. Paris: OECD.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2014b). OECD Skills
Strategy Action Report. Norway. Paris: OECD.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2002). OECD review of
career guidance policies. Australia country note. Retrieved from
http://www.oecd.org/australia/1948341.pdf.
Plant, P. (2001). Quality in career guidance. Paris: OECD.
Priestley, M., & Drew, V. (2017). Curriculum for Excellence: making the transition from policy
intention to classroom practice. Scottish Educational Journal (SEJ), 101(3), 20-21.
Rainey, L., Simons, M., Pudney, V., & Hughes, E. (2008). What choice? An evaluation of
career development services for young people. Adelaide: NCVER.
Scottish Government. (2009). Curriculum for Excellence: Building the curriculum 4. Skills for
learning, skills for life and skills for work. Edinburgh: Scottish Government.
Scottish Government. (2011). Career information, advice and guidance in Scotland: A
framework for service redesign and improvement. Edinburgh: Scottish Government.
Scottish Government. (2014). Developing the young workforce: Scotland’s youth employment
strategy. Edinburgh: Scottish Government.
Scottish Government. (2015). Developing the young workforce: Scotland’s youth employment
strategy. Annual progress report 2014-2015. Edinburgh: Scottish Government.
Scottish Government. (2016a). National improvement framework for Scottish education.
Edinburgh: Scottish Government.
58
Scottish Government. (2016b). Developing the young workforce: Scotland’s youth employment
strategy. 2
nd
annual progress report 2015-2016. Edinburgh: Scottish Government.
Shore, J., & Tosun, J. (2017). Assessing youth labour market services: Young people’s
perceptions and evaluations of service delivery in Germany. Public Policy and
Administration, 34(1), 22-41. doi: 10.1177/0952076717722192.
Simon, A. (2014). Quality assurance in university guidance services. British Journal of
Guidance & Counselling, 42(2), 181–198. doi:10.1080/03069885.2013.869789.
Skills Development Scotland. (2012). Career management skills framework for Scotland.
Available at
https://www.skillsdevelopmentscotland.co.uk/media/34749/career_management_skill
s_framework_scotland.pdf.
Skills Development Scotland. (2018a). Annual participation measure for 16-19 year olds in
Scotland 2018. Available at
https://www.skillsdevelopmentscotland.co.uk/media/44876/2018_annual-
participation-measure-report.pdf.
Skills Development Scotland. (2018b). Delivering Scotland’s careers service. Available at
https://www.skillsdevelopmentscotland.co.uk/media/44956/ciag_report_2018.pdf.
Skills Development Scotland. (2018c). 16+ data hub. Available at
https://www.skillsdevelopmentscotland.co.uk/what-we-do/scotlands-careers-
services/16plus-data-hub/.
Skills Norway (2018). Kvalitet i karriereveiledning [Quality in career guidance]. Retrieved
from https://www.kompetansenorge.no/Karriereveiledning/kvaliteti-
karriereveiledning/.
Sultana, R. G. (2011). On being a ‘boundary person’: mediating between the local and the
global in career guidance policy learning. Globalisation, societies and education, 9(2),
265-283. doi: 10.1080/14767724.2011.577326.
The Quality in Careers Consortium. (2018). The revised guide to the standard. The Quality in
Careers Consortium.
59
Watts, A. G. (2013). False dawns, bleak sunset: The Coalition Government's policies on career
guidance. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 41(4), 442-453. doi:
10.1080/03069885.2012.744956.
Yang, E., Lee, S. M., & Ahn, S. S. (2012). Career centers in higher education in South Korea:
Past, present, and future. Asian journal of Counselling, 19(1), 2-53.
Yoon, H.J., Hutchinson, B., Maze, M., Prichard, C., Reiss, A. (2018). International practices
of career service, credentials and training. Broken Arrow, OK: National Career
Development Association.
Yoon, H.J., & Pyun, C.-H. (2018). The status of career development in South Korea:
Qualifications for career professionals. In Yoon, H. J., Hutchison, B., Maze, M.,
Pritchard, C., & Reiss, A. (Eds.). (2018). International practices of career services,
credentials, and training (pp.137-159). Broken Arrow, OK: National Career
Development Association.