During the last few years all my blogs have been about the Learning Layers (LL) project – and for good reasons. Our ongoing project has kept us busy to that extent and we have learned a lot. This one, however, will report on our efforts to promote internationalisation of research in Vocational Education and Training (VET) world-wide. For this purpose we had a special event – the IRN-VET Forum – in the context of the European Conference on Educational Research (ECER’14) in the beginning of September in Porto, Portugal.

Already during ECER 2009 ‘regional’ educational research associations like EERA (Europe), AERA (America) and their counterparts had created the World Educational Research Association (WERA) to promote internationalisation and mutual exchanges in educational research. In 2013 the WERA council organised a call for proposals to set up international research networks (IRN) under the auspices of WERA. This gave rise for our initiative “Internationalisation in VET research”.

As we had witnessed for a long while, the European research community in VET research had been able to consolidate itself well under the auspices of the VETNET network of EERA. The annual ECER conferences had become the key platform and the VETNET website was used for sharing papers and presentations. In 2013 major steps were taken forward to set up a journal for the VET research community. In this context some key actors of VETNET came to the conclusion that this journal should not be limited to Europe and that it would be important to set up a global network under WERA.

The proposal for WERA IRN-VET with the overarching theme “Internationalisation in VET research” was submitted and we were happy to have founding members from Europe, Asia, America, Australia and Africa. Very soon we received the notification that the proposal had been accepted and we were free to start with the founding activities. Although it had been relatively easy to get agreements from colleagues from different global regions, it was somewhat difficult to create patterns of cooperation and launch joint activities. Therefore, before having a constituting meeting, we agreed to organise a pilot session within the VETNET program at ECER’14 – the “IRN-VET Forum”.

In the VETNET programme the IRN-VET Forum was placed on the last conference day and as the first morning session (which is normally not the most popular slot). Also, some of the key initiators who had worked with me to prepare the proposal and the session could not attend due to clashes in their calendars. Yet, we were positively surprised to note that the session had over twenty participants who showed genuine interest in the talks on internationalisation.

Here some key points on the session:

• I gave firstly a presentation on the founding steps of the WERA IRN-VET and on the key activities that we had outlined – International VET research review, Thematic sessions in ‘regional’ conferences, creating cooperation between VET teacher education programmes and PhD programmes and support for the new journal IJRVET.
• Martin Mulder gave insights into the two pilot rounds of International VET research review that had organised 2012 and 2013 with his fellow colleagues in Wageningen University. He drew attention to the fact that it was difficult to keep the review process alive as a single-university initiative but that it would be highly interesting to keep it going on as a joint activity of a global network.
• Marg Malloch and Len Cairns from Australia gave insights into the process called ‘destatalisation’ in their country. This concept refers to withdrawal of state in terms of privatisation and/or subventioning of alternative VET provisions at the expense of traditional VET providers (the TAFE colleges). Here the issue is, whether the weakening of state and the state-supported infrastructures is reflected in the quality and attractiveness of VET and what are the consequences in the labour market. The discussion drew attention to parallel developments as ‘deregulation’ in VET (e.g. regarding VET teacher education).
• Lazaro Moreno gave insights into the national PhD programme in VET research that had been launched as a joint initiative of several Swedish initiatives. Here, the issue of internationalisation came into picture via different channels (access to literature, mobility and exchanges as well as internationalisation in one’s own home country).
• Johanna Lasonen  (University of South Florida) was the discussant of the session. She encouraged further activities along these lines and drew attention to the need to pay attention to multilingualism, intercultural communication and intercultural integration

In the final part of the session I drew attention to some milestone events and we made some working agreements:

• In the VETNET assembly within the ECER’14 the launch of the new journal IJRVET was announced publicly. The first issue is available online and the next ones are under preparation. This journal serves also the WERA IRN-VET.
• In November the WERA has a focal meeting of the IRNs. By that time we have to finalise the founding regulations and the patterns of work for the IRN-VET. Also, in this context we shall discuss how to go on with the International VET research review.
• In October there will be a regular meeting of the UNESCO UNEVOC-Centres. ITB has received an invitation due to its role in VETNET. This invitation will be taken as an opportunity to inform UNEVOC of the WERA IRN-VET.
• When EERA launches the call for proposals for the ECER’15 in Budapest, we will launch a call for expressions of interest for a WERA IRN-VET Forum and/or for thematic Round Tables.

In this way the pilot event gave us further directions and impulses, how to strengthen our global cooperation.

To be continued …

In my three previous posts I have reported on the three sessions via which the Learning Layers (LL) project contributed to the European Conference on Educational Research (ECER’14) in Porto, Portugal. With this one I try to pick up some key points from the feedback we got from our colleagues.

Firstly, the presentation on the Legacy of the Work Process Knowledge network was well received – given that the network itself had been strongly present in ECER conferences between 1998 and 2006. But, what was more striking to me was the fact that the most recent changes in technologies – e.g. “Internet of things” – trigger a new interest on human interaction in organisational contexts. Thus, our researchers in vocational education and training (VET) want to find out, whether ‘organisational learning’ is merely a result of management strategies and consultants’ interventions. Or – like the WPK network argued – often unintended consequence of designed actviities, supported by shared knowledge processes.

Secondly, our symposium “Construction 2.0” appeared to be a heavy load of information. Yet – no one complained that we had all these inputs (accompanying research methodologies, the encounters between work process knowledge and mobile learning and framework for scaling up innovations). We tried to focus on the work in construction sector. As a consequence, we failed to give a sufficient picture of the other parts of the project. We tried to emphasise the relevance of our activities for work organisations. As a consequence, we got questions, why we don’t focus more directly on (vocational) learning. Yet, by the end of the symposium we had probably covered most of the questions on understanding. And furthermore – we had brought the reality of complex R&D projects into discussion.

Thirdly, with the research workshop on “Interactive research” we had clearly found a good format to bring into comparison and dialogue different innovation projects. By using a common background framework and a common format for posters we had a focused discussion on four parallel cases in similar innovation programmes. Here we can speculate whether it would have been better to have the symposium first and the workshop afterwards. Or – was the successful and dialogue-oriented workshop a good starter for digesting the heavier symposium.

Altogether, we saw that we could share knowledge on the complex and dynamic LL project already at this stage. And, moreover, we got interested counterparts who want to deepen this practice into joint knowledge development. We are looking forward to the next steps.

More blogs to come …

In my previous posts on the contributions of the Learning Layers (LL) project to the ECER’14 conference in Porto, Portugal,  I have reported on the Opening Colloquium of the VETNET network and on the LL symposium “Construction 2.0”. This third post will give insights into the joint German-Dutch research workshop on the theme “Interactive Innovation Research in VET and Working Life: Lessons from Dutch and European Projects”.

The background of this workshop was a similar session in the ECER’13 in Istanbul in which three Dutch research groups presented parallel interactive research projects and experiences with boundary-crossing practices in educational innovation projects. This triggered the initiative to prepare a similar session between a merged Dutch research group and the LL research team of ITB. We agreed to present an update on one of the earlier Dutch project and a new project. From the German side we presented the LL development projects “Learning Toolbox” and “Captus – the Learning Exhibition”.

In the workshop session we started with a joint Power Point, presented by Aimée Hoeve (HAN University of Applied Sciences). She gave insights into the key concept “Interactive research” by Per-Erik Ellström (VETNET keynote speaker at ECER’08) and into the framework of Akkerman and Baker for analysing boundary-crossing practicies in innovation practices. Based on these conceptual impulses the Dutch colleagues had developed a poster format to present complex interactive projects with focus on the following points:

• Brief description of the innovation context;
• Characterisation of the interrelations between the activity systems ‘Research’ and ‘Practice’;
• Characterisation of boundary-crossing practices in the project work;
• Reflection on lessons learned.

After the brief introduction Aimée and Loek Nieuwenhuis (also from HAN) presented the two Dutch project cases:

1. The Hybrid Learning Environment project that was carried out in two sectors Catering and Construction, see

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B02cXf0hbQH0Tm9HUE1JN0l5T0k

2. The Better Learning in Practice (BLIP) project that is being carried out in several vocational schools, see

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B02cXf0hbQH0UHVYWHdIeVdOMXM

In a second round of discussions I and Joanna Burchert presented the two LL project cases from Germany:

3. The LL development project Learning Toolbox carried out in the training centre Bau-ABC, see

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B02cXf0hbQH0TWdxbG0xWnVWTHM

4. The LL development project Captus carried out in with the Network for Ecological Construction work, see

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B02cXf0hbQH0Q0sxQ3B1VGQ2RFE

In this context it is not appropriate to try to go into more detailed discussion. (We have jointly written an article that will be published in a short while.) However, we are pleased to report that this workshop format – even in the lecture theatre -shaped room – served the purpose of bringing the audience into active interaction with us. Also, via this mode of communication we got a better understanding of each others’ projects and agreed to continue this kind of cross-project dialogue and knowledge sharing. As the next milestone we agreed to organise a joint contact workshop with more detailed information on each others’ projects. We also agreed to invite a newer Norwegian project to this cooperation.

More blogs to come …

In my previous post I started a series on the contributions of the Learning Layers (LL) project to the European Conference on Educational Research – ECER’14 – in Porto, Portugal, last week. In this entry I will focus on our main contribution – the LL symposium with the theme “Construction 2.0: Concepts, Challenges and Chances for the research & development work in the Learning Layers project”.

We had prepared this session to give an overview on

1. the R&D work in the construction sector as dynamic participative design process,
2. on the specific design issues that require mediating between work-related challenges and mobile learning and
3. on the challenges regarding ‘scaling up’ of innovations.

 The first paper – authored by me together with Ludger Deitmer and Lars Heinemann – had the title “The Role of Accompanying Research and Participative Design in the Learning Layers Project”. Our key messages can be summarised in the following way:

1. Key message: Initial shaping of the project concept of Learning Layers: In the initial phase the key achievement of the consortium was to overcome one-sided technology-push approaches and simplistic assumptions on the adaptability of web tools and software solutions that seemed context-relevant. The interim conclusion for the whole project was to launch participative design processes with relatively open innovation agendas and to allow several iterations. The interim conclusion for the ITB team was to support the interaction of different parties and to facilitate their search for specific solutions.

2. Key message: Building on prior accompanying research in innovation programmes: When looking back to prior experiences with accompanying research, the ITB has built upon the work in the  networked innovation programmes (Work and Technology, New learning Concepts) in which the coordination units supported knowledge sharing across the projects and the outreach activities. The interim conclusion for the ITB team was to look for opportunities to engage professional organisations and networks on the participative design process and to promote targeted outreach activities.

3. Key message: Adjusting the documentary and interpretative contributions to the process dynamics of participative design: During the design process (with manifold workshops) the ITB team has been responsible for the real-time documentation of the events and subsequent interpretation of the steps taken.  In this way the research team has provided a basis for joint reflection and process-awareness across different parties involved. The interim conclusion for the ITB team is that such material provides a basis for deeper conceptual interpretation of the design and transfer processes.

4. Key message: Adjusting research interventions to further development of design and transfer processes: In general, accompanying research is being legitimated as evaluation measure. Yet, in the light of the dynamics of the design process – and taking into account the goals for scaling up innovations – it has been appropriate to delay the evaluation measures.The interim conclusion for the ITB team is that the evaluation activities need to grasp the initial pilot contexts, the potential transfer contexts and the role of multipliers and peer tutoring and/or peer learning.

 The second paper – authored by me and Joanna Burchert  – had the title “Work Process Knowledge meets Mobile Learning – Insights into conceptual backgrounds and sectoral challenges within a participative design process”. In this  paper we focused on the legacy of the Work Process Knowledge network (see also my contribution to the VETNET opening colloquium) and the newer insights into mobile learning technologies. The recapitulation on the theme “work process knowledge” drew attention on the (informal) learning gains in organisational innovations. As a contrast, the newer discussion on mobile learning tends to be overshadowed by technology-push approaches and there are fewer insights into work contexts – and they tend to address motivational aspects. Here, we drew attention to the feedback we had got from apprentices and from company representatives at different phases of the participative design processes. As a conclusion, we pointed out to the need to analyse more the risks and conflicting interests that are at stake when introducing the LL tools into work organisations. Here, we saw the analogy to the case studies of the Work Process Knowledge network.

The third paper – authored by Gilbert Peffer and Tor-Arne Bellika – had the title “Designing and organising for scale – Experiences from a large-scale TEL project”.  This paper provided a wider overview on the whole LL project in its full complexity and addressed different aspects of scaling that we can take up. It explored some threads in the literature and some paths easily available for the LL pilots.Then it started working with a conceptual (synthesis) model that covers different organisational levels and brings into picture our outreach activities (including the work with managed clusters outside the pilot regions). Based on this introduction the paper looked closer at the design processes with Learning Toolbox as a progress from disconnected insular pilot to an open and expansive innovation agenda. In a similar way the paper outlined the work with cluster organisations.

I think this is enough of our input to the symposium. I will get back to the discussion in a later posting.

More blogs to come …

Last week the Learning Layers (LL) project was strongly present at the European Conference on Educational Research (ECER’14) in Porto, Portugal. This year the conference celebrated the 20th anniversary of the founding of the umbrella organisation European Educational Research (EERA) that is in charge of the annual ECER conferences. The overarching theme was “Past, Present and Future of European Educational Research“. In a similar way the EERA network for European Research in Vocational Education and Training (VETNET) took the theme “Past, Present and Future of VET Research in Europe and Beyond” for its Opening Colloquium.

As part of this Opening Colloquium I was invited to give a short presentation on the development European research in workplace learning. Originally this task was planned for two other researchers with mutually complementing approaches. As their substitute I chose to focus on the legacy of the Work Process Knowledge network – a topic that I have also brought into discussion in the first Theory Camp session of the Learning Layers project.

I first looked at the history of the network from the unfunded phase (before 1996) to the first funding period as a European network under the EU 4th Framework Programme of Research (Targeted Socio-Economic Research) to the second funding period as a transnational project on Organisational Learning under the EU FP5. During all these phases the network brought together researchers from a wide range of disciplines including ergonomics, psychology of work, VET pedagogists, industrial sociologists, organisational researchers … For the VETNET network it was important that the network was strongly present in ECER conferences from 1978 (Ljubljana) to 2006 (Geneva).

The main point of interest for us was to look at the work of a Europe-wide interdisciplinary network that focused on skilled workers’ participation in and co-shaping contribution to innovations in working life. Here, the network did not try to make an a priori agreement on one overarching umbrella theory under which it would subsume its contributions. Instead,  it organised several sets of case studies and parallel to this worked with a common interpretative framework.

The main sources for developing the framework were field studies and comparative studies of the following kind:

• studies on organisational innovations (e.g. including the introduction of quality circles) in which skilled workers’ participation and co-shaping contribution became manifest;
• studies on new manufacturing concepts (e.g. transition from conveyor belt to ‘production islands’) that gave skilled workers’ collective responsibility new importance,
• studies on hybrid qualifications and new emergining occupations (e.g. the integrative maintenance competences) that required crossing boundaries between traditional occupational fields.

With the overarching concept “Work Process Knowledge” the network drew attention  to the  acquisition of new kind knowledge in the context of innovations:

1. acquisition of work process knowledge as a whole – not merely as new ‘procedural knowledge’
2. balanced look at the role of informal learning (by-product of designed activities) and formal learning (taking up the learning gains of informal learning);
3. the possibility to give support measures to promote organisational learning with relevant tools, learning arrangements and facilitation;
4. the possibility to promote wider transfer  to other contexts by sharing knowledge and experiences.

When looking back at the history of the Work Process Knowledge network, it became apparent that the phase of the TSER-network was a unique opportunity to provide such a Europe-wide conceptual, transnational and inter-sectoral overview. In the next phase, the follow-up project focused on one branch – the chemical process industry – which was beneficial for becoming more concrete. Yet, the counter-side was the gradual particularisation regarding sectoral aspects and the size of companies. Also, the shift of emphasis brought the management perspective on organisational learning to the centre of interest.

When looking at present, it is apparent that the new presence of Internet, Web 2.0 technologies and mobile technologies open up several working issues of the network in new light. (This became apparent in the other LL sessions in the conference). When looking at the newest technologies that overshadow the construction sector (e.g. “Internet of things”, 3D-printing with new materials, Building Information Modelling (BIM)), there are other challenges that are similar to the ones already discussed by the network at an earlier stage.

Interestingly enough, in the Opening Colloquium Karen Evans raised three main points for looking at past and present and how to draw conclusions for the future:

• Making VET research robust (awareness of conceptual and methodological grounds but being open for new issues),
• Making VET research more dialogue-oriented (research, development and practice working together),
• Making VET research more comparative (both system level, organisational level and in historical terms).

I think this is enough of the opening session. The main contributions of the LL project were in two other sessions – the symposium “Construction 2.0” and the research workshop on “Interactive research”.

More posts to come …