[PASSED] Recognising Achievements Act

by **Ossitania** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:01 pm

Recognising Achievements Act
A resolution to reduce barriers to free trade and commerce.

Category: Free Trade | Strength: Mild | Proposed by: Ossitania

Description: The World Assembly,

OBSERVING that there is a great diversity of educational standards and philosophies between institutes of higher education,

FURTHER OBSERVING that academic nomenclature varies just as much as educational standards,

CONCERNED that apprehensions about the quality of academic titles may reduce the employability of highly skilled individuals,

BELIEVING that a system clarifying the levels of education that individuals have received would be a boon to both individuals and their prospective employers,

Hereby,

DEFINES "institutes of accreditation" as any national or supranational organisation charged with determining the validity of academic qualifications and/or awarding suitably-qualified individuals with the right to use legally-protected professional titles,

CHARGES institutes of accreditation with the task of developing a functional national equivalence for all academic titles being held by those who legally seek work inside their area of operation,

OBLIGES all institutes of accreditation to supply information on qualifications inside their area of operation to other institutes of accreditation upon request of such,

PROHIBITS institutes of accreditation from refusing individuals access to their accreditation process based solely on the nation where their qualification was earned,

PERMITS institutes of accreditation to charge a nominal fee to cover the costs involved with accrediting qualifications earned in other nations,

CLARIFIES that this resolution neither requires nor prohibits any particular method or process of academic accreditation.

Co-authored by Knootoss

This is the first draft of an idea I've been mulling over for a while. I debated putting it in Education and Creativity, but felt that this was more concerned with aiding free trade than anything else. Obviously, it needs to be tidied up a bit, possibly expanded, but that's why I bring it before you, my lovely colleagues in the WA.

((OOC: Inspired by my girlfriend's father, who was once one on his way to becoming one of Algeria's top architects but who has to slum it as a taxi driver because his degrees in architecture aren't recognised here in Ireland.))

by **Moronist Decisions** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:22 pm

Like you, we are not sure about the category, but we do believe that such a framework would be useful. I would propose adding the clause:

URGES institutes of accreditation to accept recommendations from the International Qualification Authority regarding equivalencies of qualifications

Otherwise, we like the balance between national sovereignty and loosening up the qualifications system. From a professional standpoint, as a faculty member, I do see potential issues where levels of educational attainment can be different even though it is theoretically equivalent due to delivery and assessment issues, and would also support a clause of the form

RECOMMENDS all institutes of accreditation to supply sufficient information to other institutes of accreditation and the International Qualification Authority for a professional, accurate determination to be made.

Finally, given that there are many situations where the accrediting body is also the examining body - i.e. it grants the qualification as well as validates it, I would broaden the definition of institutes of accreditation to

DEFINES "institutes of accrediation" as any organisation charged with determining the validity of academic qualifications and/or awarding legally-protected professional qualifications.

to include such things as standard degrees and public high school examinations [added: such as the Moronist Decisions Preliminary Tripos Examination (OOC: such as the British A-Levels or the IB)]

by **Embolalia** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 9:40 pm

Oh, dear LORD! Can we find something less important to micromanage please? Jee-sus.

-E. Rory Hywel

by **Darenjo** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 9:44 pm

Though your story is very moving, I have a feeling that's due to anti-Muslim bias more than anything else, not nomenclature issues.

Sorry, but no.

by **Moronist Decisions** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 4:30 am

Darenjo wrote:Though your story is very moving, I have a feeling that's due to anti-Muslim bias more than anything else, not nomenclature issues.

Sorry, but no.

Speaking from RL, no. Many nations in this world actually do not accept qualifications from other countries. Examples include, for instance, doctors and nurses trained in Mainland China practicing in Hong Kong.

by **Darenjo** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 4:59 am

Moronist Decisions wrote:
Darenjo wrote:Though your story is very moving, I have a feeling that's due to anti-Muslim bias more than anything else, not nomenclature issues.

Sorry, but no.

Speaking from RL, no. Many nations in this world actually do not accept qualifications from other countries. Examples include, for instance, doctors and nurses trained in Mainland China practicing in Hong Kong.

Once again, it may be anti-Muslim bias - the man in Ossi's story may not be Muslim, butAlgeria is.

by **Charlotte Ryberg** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 6:34 am

I appreciate the idea of this resolution but it seems at best the recognition of qualifications were only possible through bespoke multilateral agreements rather than by the command of the UN/WA.

by **Ossitania** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:33 am

Moronist Decisions wrote:Like you, we are not sure about the category, but we do believe that such a framework would be useful. I would propose adding the clause:

URGES institutes of accreditation to accept recommendations from the International Qualification Authority regarding equivalencies of qualifications

I accept the proposed addition and will include it in the second draft.

Moronist Decisions wrote:Otherwise, we like the balance between national sovereignty and loosening up the qualifications system. From a professional standpoint, as a faculty member, I do see potential issues where levels of educational attainment can be different even though it is theoretically equivalent due to delivery and assessment issues, and would also support a clause of the form

RECOMMENDS all institutes of accreditation to supply sufficient information to other institutes of accreditation and the International Qualification Authority for a professional, accurate determination to be made.

The phrasing needs to be shifted around but I get where you're coming from. I will take your concerns into consideration.

Moronist Decisions wrote:Finally, given that there are many situations where the accrediting body is also the examining body - i.e. it grants the qualification as well as validates it, I would broaden the definition of institutes of accreditation to

DEFINES "institutes of accrediation" as any organisation charged with determining the validity of academic qualifications and/or awarding legally-protected professional qualifications.

to include such things as standard degrees and public high school examinations [added: such as the Moronist Decisions Preliminary Tripos Examination (OOC: such as the British A-Levels or the IB)]

I disagree with change of definition, because the kind of organisations I'm talking about don't give qualifications. The qualifications would be received from the school, university, etc. the institute of accreditation would merely acknowledge it as a valid qualification.

Embolalia wrote:Oh, dear LORD! Can we find something less important to micromanage please? Jee-sus.

-E. Rory Hywel

I was expecting the M-word to be brought up, but not from someone as intelligent and respected as the ambassador from Embolalia. This proposal does not "micromanage", it doesn't even "manage", for Christ's sake. The proposal as drafted requires nothing of member nations other than that the official bodies in their nation in charge of accrediting qualifications and giving individuals the right to use protected professional terms not refuse to do so based solely on the country where the qualification was earned.

I, for one, am frankly sick of "micromanagement" being thrown about without any consideration for what the word actually means. It's coming to the stage where any proposal that anyone writes is going to be labelled "micromanagement" if the issue is deemed not important enough or incur the wrath of NatSovers if the issue is deemed too important, with little-to-no middle ground.

Darenjo wrote:Though your story is very moving, I have a feeling that's due to anti-Muslim bias more than anything else, not nomenclature issues.

Sorry, but no.

((OOC: The nomenclature issues have nothing to do with my girlfriend's father, his qualification is not recognised because it was earned in Algeria, which, if you read the proposal, is the first issue raised in the preamble and addressed in the operative clauses. I included nomenclature issues because misunderstanding of levels of education is as much a barrier to industry as refusal to recognise qualifications based on the country where the qualifications were earned. This proposal may have been inspired by my girlfriend's father, but the proposal itself is concerned with industry.))

Darenjo wrote:Once again, it may be anti-Muslim bias - the man in Ossi's story may not be Muslim, butAlgeria is.

((OOC: Which is rather the point of the legislation; prohibiting institutes of accreditation from refusing to recognise qualifications based solely on the country where the qualifications were earned.))

Charlotte Ryberg wrote:I appreciate the idea of this resolution but it seems at best the recognition of qualifications were only possible through bespoke multilateral agreements rather than by the command of the UN/WA.

I am not attempting to force institutes of accreditation to recognise qualifications, I am merely prohibiting them from refusing to recognise them based solely on the country where they were earned. If they have other reasons for refusing to recognise them, then that's perfectly fine, I'm only concerned with refusal to recognise based solely on the country where the qualification was earned.

by **Great Nepal** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:47 am

Oh holy lord, serriiouslly?
And there may be good reason to refuse to acknowledge some nation's qualifications - for example if in a nation it is very easy to get an qualification compared to our own, we will refuse to acknowledge it - at least in government organisations and we expect private institutions to do the same. If a nation has huge problem of fake certificates, we will refuse those nation's qualification as well.
And why is this a fucking international issue anyway?

by **Ossitania** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 10:04 am

Great Nepal wrote:Oh holy lord, serriiouslly?
And there may be good reason to refuse to acknowledge some nation's qualifications - for example if in a nation it is very easy to get an qualification compared to our own, we will refuse to acknowledge it - at least in government organisations and we expect private institutions to do the same. If a nation has huge problem of fake certificates, we will refuse those nation's qualification as well.
And why is this a fucking international issue anyway?

Ambassador, we acknowledge that in some countries the standards of education and requirements to earn a qualification are low, in such cases, your institutes of accreditation can simply follow IQA's recommendations on what the qualification roughly equals in your country.

For example, let's say that in Country X, a doctorate is awarded upon completion of high school-level education. If a resident of Country X comes to your nation, your institutes of accreditation can check the framework established by IQA and say "That qualification is roughly equivalent to a high school diploma." Employers can do the same.

I am not, by any means, attempting to force anyone to recognise shoddy qualifications as being more than they are. Furthermore, in relation to the issue of fake certs, the international co-operation that this proposal encourages would help crack down on such certs, because an institute of accreditation would merely need to put a line through to another country's institute to verify that such-and-such college exists and if it does, call said college to check if the individual seeking recognition actually earned the qualification.

Finally, this is an international issue because (1) recognition of qualifications from other countries is inherently international and (2) arbitrary refusal to recognise such is harmful to both workers and employers because it reduces the employability of workers and the potential hiring pool of employers, in short, passing this resolution would be beneficial to industry.

by **Knootoss** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 10:14 am

Knootian Opinion:

From the World Assembly office of the Dutch Democratic Republic of Knootoss

To: ____Ossitania____
From: ____A. Koopman____

Dear Sir/Madam,

I would like to express my

[X] SUPPORT
[ ] AMBIGUOUS SILENCE
[ ] OUTRAGE
[ ] DESPAIR
[ ] _____________

with regards to your latest World Assembly resolution, ____International Qualifications Network____.

As a long-time member of the World Assembly, the Dutch Democratic Republic is committed to the promotion of sentient rights, free trade and security cooperation in the World Assembly. The Knootian government would like work with you, ____Ossitania____, to draft high-quality resolutions for this august body. In our evaluation, the current draft of the resolution is:

[ ] JUST PERFECT
[ ] ALMOST READY FOR SUBMISSION
[X] A GOOD START
[ ] IN NEED OF SERIOUS IMPROVEMENT
[ ] MILDLY OFFENSIVE
[ ] BEYOND REDEMPTION

Possible areas of improvement are:

[X] SPELLING
[ ] GRAMMAR
[ ] FORMAT
[ ] LENGTH
[X] CONTENT (see below)

We also worry that the resolution might be illegal because it:

[ ] CREATES WA POLICE/ARMY
[ ] BANS AN IDEOLOGY
[ ] IS ENTIRELY OPTIONAL
[ ] REFERENCES A FORBIDDEN SUBJECT
[X] HAS BEEN SUBMITTED WITH THE WRONG CATEGORY/STRENGTH
[ ] IS A HOUSE OF CARDS
[ ] IS GROSSLY OFFENSIVE AND/OR BLOODY STUPID
[ ] DUPLICATES OR CONTRADICTS AN EARLIER RESOLUTION

[ ] ILLEGAL (other): ________________________

In addition, the government of the Dutch Democratic Republic has some concerns that you may want to address:

[ ] INFRINGES ON CIVIL LIBERTIES
[ ] IS BAD FOR THE ECONOMY
[ ] IS AUTHORITARIAN
[X] CREATES A POINTLESS COMMITTEE
[X] LACKS LEGAL SAFEGUARDS
[ ] LACKS AN INTERNATIONAL COMPONENT
[ ] IMPOSES AUTHORS ECONOMIC MODEL
[X] MICROMANAGES
[X] ______tries to establish uniformity, rather than compatibility______

If you have any further questions, do not hesitate to contact the Knootian World Assembly office! Our experienced diplomats are ready to take your call. If desired, we can give specific pointers for your convenience.

by **Moronist Decisions** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 10:41 am

Given the concerns of Great Nepal - which I share - I would suggest making the following changes:

PROHIBITS institutes of accreditation from refusing to recognise academic qualifications based solely on the nation where the qualification was earned in general.

PERMITS institutes of accreditation to require verification of academic qualifications through completion of appropriate assessment exercises in cases of possible fraud.

(I haven't thought this through carefully, but I do see that as a genuine concern).

by **Ossitania** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 11:04 am

Moronist Decisions wrote:Given the concerns of Great Nepal - which I share - I would suggest making the following changes:

PROHIBITS institutes of accreditation from refusing to recognise academic qualifications based solely on the nation where the qualification was earned in general.

PERMITS institutes of accreditation to require verification of academic qualifications through completion of appropriate assessment exercises in cases of possible fraud.

(I haven't thought this through carefully, but I do see that as a genuine concern).

I disagree. The resolution doesn't prevent institutes of accreditation from doing anything except refuse to recognise a qualification based solely on the nation where the qualification was earned and that's how I want it to say. "Permitting" institutes of accreditation to do things moves this proposal into micromanagement territory, which is something I want to avoid.

by **Knootoss** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 11:14 am

Replacing the Useless Gnome Committee with a provision to mandate that institutions of learning make a good faith effort to accredit existing diploma's would improve this thing, quite a bit.

Ambassador Aram Koopman
World Assembly representative for the Dutch Democratic Republic of Knootoss

by **Ossitania** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 12:39 pm

Knootoss wrote:Replacing the Useless Gnome Committee with a provision to mandate that institutions of learning make a good faith effort to accredit existing diploma's would improve this thing, quite a bit.

Ambassador Aram Koopman
World Assembly representative for the Dutch Democratic Republic of Knootoss

Institutions of learning generally don't accredit their own qualifications, though, ambassador. Accreditation is usually done by a single government body or by organisations with oversight on qualifications for a certain profession, i.e. Psychological Association of X, the Xish Architect's Union.

Furthermore, I don't doubt the usefulness of IQA, especially given that the ambassador from Knootoss just provided an example of how the terminology used to describe qualifications can be confused; in certain nations (such as, evidently, Knootoss) the term "diploma" is a general term referring to an academic qualification or, more specifically, the actual certificate presented to the individual upon earning their qualification, whereas in other nations (such as Ossitania), the term "diploma" denotes a specific type of qualification, i.e. a Diploma in Education Studies.

This is an example of the kind of scenario I am attempting to avert; in countries where "diploma" is a general term, it may be confusing when an applicant lists "Diploma in Education Studies" on their CV, as the prospective employer may be uncertain as to what level of education the applicant has received, prompting them to pass over that individual in favour of someone with a "BA in Education Studies", despite the fact that in the passed-over applicant's home country, a "diploma" is the equivalent of a bachelor's degree rather than a general term.

However, with the framework designed by IQA, the employer can simply type the qualification and institution that awarded it into a database, which tells it that a "diploma" is the equivalent of a bachelor's degree in his country. This gives the applicant a better chance of being employed and the employer a larger hiring pool, both of which are good for industry.

That said, could the ambassador from Knootoss clarify what he wants added and why?

by **Quelesh** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 4:47 pm

This is an interesting idea, and one that I can support.

Ossitania wrote:DEFINES "institutes of accrediation" as any organisation charged with determining the validity of academic qualifications and/or awarding suitably-qualified individuals with the right to use legally-protected professional terms, i.e. "doctor", "architect", etc.

i.e. should be e.g. here.

by **Ossitania** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 5:00 pm

Quelesh wrote:This is an interesting idea, and one that I can support.

Ossitania wrote:DEFINES "institutes of accrediation" as any organisation charged with determining the validity of academic qualifications and/or awarding suitably-qualified individuals with the right to use legally-protected professional terms, i.e. "doctor", "architect", etc.

i.e. should be e.g. here.

Thank you for the constructive criticism, honoured delegate.

by **Bears Armed** » Sat Mar 05, 2011 9:37 am

"Hr'rmm, I think that my government could probably support this. At least... It wouldn't keep us from specifying that foreign doctors must have been trained in Ursine medicine rather than just in Human medicine before they can set up practices in our country, hrright?"

Artorrios o SouthWoods,
Chairbear, Bears Armed Mission at the World Assembly

by **Glen-Rhodes** » Sat Mar 05, 2011 10:02 am

Glen-Rhodes will not recognize the foreign accreditation of an individual unless the standards used in his or her homeland reflect or surpass the standards used in Glen-Rhodes. It should be made clear in the text that this practice is not hindered.

- Dr. B. Castro

by **Mahaj WA Seat** » Sat Mar 05, 2011 10:07 am

Dear lord.

I think not.

by **Sanctaria** » Sat Mar 05, 2011 10:43 am

Glen-Rhodes wrote:Glen-Rhodes will not recognize the foreign accreditation of an individual unless the standards used in his or her homeland reflect or surpass the standards used in Glen-Rhodes. It should be made clear in the text that this practice is not hindered.

- Dr. B. Castro

I have to agree with Dr. Castro in this regard.

by **Bears Armed** » Sat Mar 05, 2011 10:46 am

Glen-Rhodes wrote:Glen-Rhodes will not recognize the foreign accreditation of an individual unless the standards used in his or her homeland reflect or surpass the standards used in Glen-Rhodes. It should be made clear in the text that this practice is not hindered.

- Dr. B. Castro

OOC: Effectively covered?

PROHIBITS institutes of accreditation from refusing to recognise academic qualifications based solely on the nation where the qualification was earned,

by **Sanctaria** » Sat Mar 05, 2011 10:49 am

Bears Armed wrote:
Glen-Rhodes wrote:Glen-Rhodes will not recognize the foreign accreditation of an individual unless the standards used in his or her homeland reflect or surpass the standards used in Glen-Rhodes. It should be made clear in the text that this practice is not hindered.

- Dr. B. Castro

OOC: Effectively covered?
PROHIBITS institutes of accreditation from refusing to recognise academic qualifications based solely on the nation where the qualification was earned,

Wouldn't that be covered by the CoCR anyway then? Discrimination based on nationality?

by **Bears Armed** » Sat Mar 05, 2011 10:55 am

Sanctaria wrote:
Bears Armed wrote:
OOC: Effectively covered?

Wouldn't that be covered by the CoCR anyway then? Discrimination based on nationality?

No. After all, they could be nationals of the country where the qualification is being rejected, who happen for some reason to have studied abroad...

by **Glen-Rhodes** » Sat Mar 05, 2011 10:56 am

Bears Armed wrote:OOC: Effectively covered?
PROHIBITS institutes of accreditation from refusing to recognise academic qualifications based solely on the nation where the qualification was earned,

OOC: Too vague.

[PASSED] Recognising Achievements Act

[PASSED] Recognising Achievements Act

Who is online