The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has again published a report on the labor market needs: “Quality Matters: Strengthening the Quality Assurance of Adult Education and Training“. The report goes deeper into the changes that happen(ed) in Adult Education and Training (AET) across OECD countries.
One key conclusion is that strong quality checks are more important than ever. They help make sure education programs are high quality and match job market needs. In respect to this, we advise you to also check the alarming skills gaps observed with immigrants.
In this article we will explain the various aspect of the report and its conclusions.
Below is the video of the official launch of “Quality Matters: Strengthening the Quality Assurance of Adult Education and Training” presented two days ago.
- 1 Why is Quality Assurance Needed in Adult Education and Training (AET)?
- 2 How is Quality Assurance Implemented in AET?
- 3 Who is Responsible for Quality Assurance?
- 4 What Has Been Done so far on Quality Assurance?
- 5 Quality Assurance in 2025 and Beyond
- 6 A Thorough Comparative Analysis of Quality Assurance in AET
- 7 Authors Of The Report
Why is Quality Assurance Needed in Adult Education and Training (AET)?
Quality assurance in Adult Education and Training (AET) is essential to ensure that learners receive relevant skills and knowledge that align with labor market needs. Without robust quality standards, low-quality programs can proliferate, leading to wasted resources and ineffective skill-building efforts.
But what should we understand under ineffective skill-building efforts? We wil clarify this by giving you various examples:
- Lack of Clear Objectives: A company introduces a new project management tool without clearly communicating its purpose and expected benefits. Employees become reluctant to adopt the tool, rendering the training ineffective.
- Insufficient Engagement: A compliance training program relies solely on lengthy lectures and text-heavy slides, leading to disengagement among employees. Many participants click through the material without absorbing crucial information.
- Neglecting Individual Learning Styles: An organization mandates all employees to undergo the same e-learning course, disregarding the fact that some may prefer hands-on workshops or peer-based learning. This one-size-fits-all approach fails to accommodate diverse learning preferences.
- Lack of Follow-Up and Reinforcement: An IT training program introduces employees to new software without providing follow-up support or periodic reinforcement. Consequently, employees forget how to use the software over time.
- Inadequate Measurement and Evaluation: A company implements a leadership training program but relies solely on post-training surveys to measure success. These surveys do not capture the actual application of leadership skills in the workplace, leading to a misrepresentation of the training’s effectiveness.
Enters quality assurance. It ensures that AET programs offer valuable learning experiences. It also makes sure that these align the training with market demands and societal needs. Add to this also public accountability through regulation and the support for continuous improvement in training institutions. And all this while facilitating the recognition of prior learning (RPL) to make education more accessible.
Additionally, quality assurance plays a central role in broader skills strategies, ensuring that AET policies are effective and sustainable.
How is Quality Assurance Implemented in AET?
Quality assurance mechanisms in AET take various forms across OECD countries. In the report we find four key types of quality assurance mechanisms:
- Certification – AET providers receive a formal recognition (e.g., ISO29990, ISO9001) after meeting specific quality standards.
- Quality Awards – Institutions compete for excellence-based awards, such as Finland’s Ministry of Education and Culture award.
- Quality Inspections – Regular assessments of AET institutions conducted by independent authorities (e.g., the UK’s Ofsted model).
- Self-Assessment – Internal reviews conducted by AET providers to reflect on and improve their quality.
To evaluate the AET providers, multiple assessment tools should be used:
- Performance Indicators (enrollment, graduation rates, learning outcomes).
- Expert Reviews (independent evaluations by specialists).
- Interviews (gathering qualitative insights from stakeholders).
- Self-Assessment Questionnaires (institutional self-evaluations).
- Site Visits (on-location inspections).
- Surveys (feedback from students, teachers, and employers).
On top AET providers are also required to comply with nine core quality areas, including leadership, training design, staff recruitment, and regulatory compliance.
Who is Responsible for Quality Assurance?
The responsible entities for overseeing quality assurance vary across countries, but generally they fall into three categories:
- Government Agencies – Independent government bodies managing quality assurance autonomously (e.g., Australian Skills Quality Authority).
- Ministerial Departments – Specific departments within a ministry handling quality assurance directly (e.g., Portugal’s Directorate-General for Education and Science).
- Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) – Independent organizations setting and maintaining quality standards (e.g., Swiss Federation for Adult Learning).
In most OECD countries, government agencies play the primary role, with nearly 50% of mechanisms being overseen by them.
Examples of Quality Assurance in Action
- Finland: Uses a quality award system where AET providers compete based on excellence, with winners displaying an official quality badge.
- United Kingdom (England): Conducts quality inspections using a grading system, with some providers at risk of losing funding if they fail to meet standards.
- France: Requires certification for AET providers to be eligible for public funding.
- Ireland: Has one of the most comprehensive systems, covering eight out of nine quality areas.
- Colombia, Estonia, Japan: Have registry listing requirements, ensuring only approved institutions operate legally.
What Has Been Done so far on Quality Assurance?
Luckily enough the document holds data which shows the current state of quality assurance across OECD countries.
- 63% of mechanisms use certification as the primary quality assurance tool.
- 18% of mechanisms rely on quality inspections.
- 16% of mechanisms implement self-assessment models.
- Only Finland uses a quality award model.
Additionally:
- 45% of mechanisms require a Quality Management System (QMS).
- 36% enforce regulatory compliance, ensuring providers adhere to laws and ethical standards.
- 94% assess training design and delivery, making it the most widespread quality area.
Quality Assurance in 2025 and Beyond
The report provides a comprehensive analysis of how OECD countries manage AET quality assurance. We can split them up into 4 fields:
- Diversity in Approaches – No single method dominates, but certification is the most widely used mechanism.
- Government’s Role – Most quality assurance mechanisms are managed by government agencies or ministerial departments.
- Varied Assessment Methods – Site visits and performance indicator analysis are the most common evaluation tools.
- Provider Incentives – Benefits of participating in quality assurance include:
- Access to public funding.
- Eligibility to display quality labels.
- Inclusion in government-approved provider registries.
But that’s not all, the study clearly stresses that quality assurance must be continuously refined to keep up with the changes in adult education and challenges. These challenges include investment costs, resistance to change, and the decentralized nature of AET which must be addressed for long-term effectiveness.
A Thorough Comparative Analysis of Quality Assurance in AET
The OECD’s “Quality Matters: Strengthening the Quality Assurance of Adult Education and Training” report really does provide a thorough comparative analysis of quality assurance in AET. It furthermore offers excellent insights for policymakers, educators, and training providers.
And as described earlier in other reports on labor and education, it, again, emphasizes that quality assurance must be continuously refined.
For a more detailed exploration of the report’s findings and recommendations, you can access the full document here.
Authors Of The Report
The OECD report “Quality Matters: Strengthening the Quality Assurance of Adult Education and Training” was coordinated by Ricardo Espinoza, an analyst at the OECD.
The contributing authors include:
- Chapter 1 (Introduction): Ricardo Espinoza (OECD).
- Chapter 2 (Comparative Analysis of Quality Assurance Mechanisms in AET): Ricardo Espinoza (OECD) and Nerea Martinez Yarza (University of Deusto, Bilbao).
- Chapter 3 (Enabling Informed Choices in AET): Simon Broek (Senior Expert at Ockham – IPS).
- Chapter 4 (Tracking Outcomes in AET): Mark D’Amico (University of North Carolina Charlotte), Michelle Van Noy (Rutgers University), Kyle Albert (George Washington University), and Justin Vinton (Rutgers University).
- Chapter 5 (Ensuring Quality in Digital AET): Ricardo Espinoza (OECD), Andrew Bell (OECD), and Simon Broek (Ockham – IPS).
The project was supervised by Andrew Bell (OECD), with strategic oversight from El Iza Mohamedou, Stefano Scarpetta, and Mark Pearson, all from the OECD.