At the end of April this year I had left behind all the work after the final review of our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. We had completed the work for the review and the additional tasks that were required to clarify the picture. At that time I was looking forward to revisit the project experience and wrote myself a “ToDo List” – outlining a set of working papers that I wanted to complete as soon as possible. This is what I wrote as my opening statement:

“Now, we have a chance to revisit the project experience and draw conceptual and methodological conclusions of our work in the Construction pilot. And I have booked myself in to three conferences to have a closer look at our achievements and how review them from a conceptual point of view.”

Little did I know at that time, what kind of intervening factors may cause delays to such plans. Instead of working three papers ready by the middle of August I had to take a break and give thoughts on something bigger than my work. Yet, having taken the time I needed, I am happy to announce that I have completed the ToDo List of late April. Today I have uploaded the last one of the designed three Working Papers on my account on ResearchGate. And in order to put the three Working Papers into a group picture, I published the following update:

“During the year 2017 I have written three parallel working papers that are the pillars for my re-examination of our work in the Learning Layers project and its Construction pilot. Together they provide insights into our methodological orientation and to two central theoretical themes in the context of a participative research & development project:

This week I have had a chance to participate in some working meetings that have discussed further work with the “Learning Toolbox – LTB”. As readers of this blog have learned during the last few years, the LTB was the main result of the Construction pilot of our EU-funded project “Learning Layers LL” (2012 – 2016). In the project researchers, technical partners and application partners in North Germany were involved in the co-design of the LTB and in the pilot testing of this integrative toolset in apprentice training and in the coordination of construction work. LTB was built as an integrative toolset that linked together mobile apps, resource tiles and communication tiles. As such it has facilitated project-based learning of construction sector apprentices in the training centre Bau-ABC Rostrup. In a similar way it has facilitated the cooperation and coordination work of construction site manager in a special project of ecological construction work in Verden. (These achievements of the LL project and the transition to follow-up activities have been discussed in my blogs in 2016 and in the first half of 2017).

In Spring 2017 I witnessed several working meetings in which my colleagues from Institut Technik & Bildung (ITB) and developers of LTB were discussing follow-up activities of the LL Construction pilot – with emphasis on new contexts for using the LTB.  Now – after a lengthy break – I had the chance to observe some further steps and progress to new milestones in these follow-up activities. In May I wrote more detailed blogs on these earlier meetings and on the initiatives that were taking shape. This time it is enough to make brief notes on the progress and on new milestones to be reached in the near future.

Verden: Looking at integrative hardware and software solutions to support process optimisation an construction site

In our previous meeting with the LL application partner Thomas Isselhard we had discussed several initiatives to promote the use of LTB via his networks for ecological construction work. This time my ITB-colleague Werner Müller and our LL-partner Gilbert Peffer (CIMNE) took further steps in their talks in Verden towards shaping one central initiative. The aim is to bring together hardware development (“BIM-Koffer”), software development (BIM, construction sector applications and network connectivity) and uses of LTB at construction sites. With this initiative the colleagues want to tackle several key issues that prevent effective uses of mobile technologies at construction sites. I am looking forward to hearing more of the further steps.

Firma H: Shaping integrative software ecologies to optimise company-specific knowledge processes and workplace learning

The next meeting (which I could also attend) was an interim assessment of the feasibility study and the workshop process that my colleagues had carried out with the company H (see my blog of last May). Now my colleagues had finalised their  feasibilty study and provided a draft report on the workshop with the company staff (of last June). Now the discussion focused on starting a short-term pilot with the solutions that were proposed in the reports: to start a transition to a more integrative software ecology – including new online communication arrangements between the offices and the worksite troops (with the help of LTB). The meeting made progress in setting the schedules, defining the pilot sites and the modes of participation (project team, supporting training arrangements). I am looking forward to hear more when the project activities in the field will start early next year.

Bau-ABC Rostrup: Continuing the work with Learning Toolbox and linking it to new software ecology

Our final meeting was at Bau-ABC Rostrup, our central application partner in the co-design and pilot testing of the LTB. With Bau-ABC we have had several follow-up activities/initiatives on which we now had a catch-up meeting.

In spring I had worked with a group of full-time trainers (Lehrwerkmeister) to develop coherent patterns for training in the cross-cutting area ‘health and safety’ (Arbeitssicherheit und Gesundheitsschutz) until the holiday break. (I have blogged on this activity in April and May 2017.) Unfortunately I had to extend my stay in Finland for personal reasons and then I got other duties. Now I was pleased to learn that a similar pattern of parallel thematic groups had been established and that there was an internal support team. Moreover, it was inspiring that these groups were also working with the LTB and its use in initial vocational training.

Parallel to this my colleagues have been working in the German-funded DigiProB project that introduces digital media to Continuing Vocational Training of construction sector professionals. In the project meetings and workshops that I followed in Spring I could see that this project shaped a new software ecology to match with each other a traditional course management database, an innovative platform for integrative project development and a workable mobile toolset for course participants. I will not go into the technicalities. The important thing in our catch up-meeting was that we could address the latest issues on the role of LTB as the participants interface for accessing course information and for planning their participation.

– – –

I think that this is enough for a quick update on these follow-up activities of the Learning Layers’ Construction pilot. My main point here is to demonstrate that our work with LTB is being continued with several application partners and on several fronts. Although the work with LTB may not have scaled up that quickly as expected, we are making progress in getting the work grounded. In my next post I will give another kind of progress report on work with the Learning Toolbox.

More blogs to come …

In my previous blog I started a series of posts to wrap up my experiences in the European Conference on Educational Research (ECER 2017) that took place last week in Copenhagen. I presented a thematic overview and a working agenda to explore different aspects that came up in the sessions I attended. With this post I give insights into my own presentation.

Background, work plan and modification of the plan

This year all my conference presentations focus on revisiting and reconceptualising our experience with the Learning Layers project and its Construction pilot. In particular I want to highlight the particular role of our “Begleitforschung” (Accompanying research) approach in the complex projects. Initially I had planned to write three parallel research papers and to present them in three successive conferences (see my post of April “Revisiting the Learning Layers experience – A “ToDo List” for forthcoming conferences“). I could partly implement it by preparing the first paper for the Stockholm International VET Conference in May – with emphasis on Accompanying research as promoter of action-oriented learning (Handlungsorientiertes Lernen). Then, I could prepare a second paper that I intended to present in the Rostock International VET Conference one week before the ECER. In this paper the main emphasis was given on revisiting the theme ‘work process knowledge’ and linking it to newer innovation agendas – in particular to “Industry 4.0”. However, then – due to intervening factors – I neither had the chance to present this paper in Rostock nor to prepare a third paper for ECER. Thus, I had to postpone my work with the methodological development of Accompanying research in the Learning Layers project (compared with prior approaches in pilot projects and innovation programmes).

Looking back at Learning Layers project – and forward to the follow-up

As has been the case with some other presentations, I had to give some background information, how the Learning Layers project was shaped and how the two sectoral pilots (in Healthcare and Construction) worked. Then I had to give insights into the change in the design idea – from digitising learning resources to shaping of the Learning Toolbox (LTB) and to different iterations. Finally, I had to to draw attention to the complementary relations between co-design workshops, multimedia training and pilot testing with digital tools. Mostly, these activities were carried out in the training centre Bau-ABC of the North-German construction industries and trades. Here, the key achievement was the introduction of the LTB as a digital toolset to support (trade-specific) training and learning in Bau-ABC.

But I also managed to give insights into the follow-up activities that promote company-specific applications of the LTB (as contributions to overarching management of work-related knowledge processes) and similar uses of LTB in continuing vocational training (as support for integrative curriculum development and learning approaches). In addition, one follow-up process is shaping integrative approaches to ‘health and safety’  in construction sector. All these processes are taking further steps to reach real work contexts and users in work organisations.

Revisiting the theme ‘work process knowledge’ and analysing old and new innovation agendas

In the light of the above it was worthwhile recapitulating, what we had learned from studying the legacy of the “Work process knowledge network” of the years 1997 -2004. In particular it was important to compare the views on the role of VET and informal learning in promoting the acquisition of work process knowledge. Furthermore, it was important to take on board the recent analyses on three generations of innovation programmes in working life (‘Humanisation of work’, ‘Learning organisations’ and ‘Industry 4.0’). With the emerging innovation agenda ‘Industry 4.0’ I explored the recent analyses of German sociologists and educationalists on the general frontiers in the debates (techno-centric v.s. socio-technical approaches) and efforts to develop spaces and facilities for learning within work processes or to shape complementary learning spaces.

– – –

I think this is enough for a brief introduction. The long version of my paper is available on ResearchGate (see ‘Begleitforschung’ as contributor to digitisation in vocational education and training (VET) for construction sector – Linking ‘work process knowledge’ to ‘Industry 4.0’. The short version will be published in the proceedings of the Rostock conference (see the forthcoming conference proceedings). And my PowerPoint presentation will be published on the website of the VETNET network (see the Vetnetsite/2017 Copenhagen Presentations).

Concerning the feedback that I got, I note that the issue ‘scientific status of accompanying research’ has been discussed recently when the research work of the Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training (BIBB) in Germany has been evaluated. Indeed, I need to continue my work with this theme and inform myself the points made in this evaluation.

In my next posts I will discuss some key themes that were discussed in several sessions.

More blogs to come …

In my previous post I already made some remarks on the circumstances that overshadowed my participation in ECER 2017 and on my plans to report on the experience on the VETNET sessions. Yet, I think it is better that I provide a thematic overview – or a working agenda – for my forthcoming blogs. With each of the themes to be covered I have also different role positions and interests of knowledge that need to be taken into account.

For the moment I see the need to report on the following themes:

• My own presentation on “Begleitforschung” (Accompanying research) in the context of the Learning Layers project and in the follow-up of its construction pilot;
• Issues on European/national qualification frameworks and in studies on credit transfer – in current projects and in the VETNET sessions of the past;
• Issues on vocational teacher education and on the role of practice-based learning (= practicum) phases – in current contexts and as topics of our previous European projects;
• Discussions on ‘multi-methodological practices’ and perspective transformations in research on vocational education and training (VET) – in the light of current studies and earlier (implicit) agreements on European VET research (within the VETNET community);
• Updates on recent news and developments in the VETNET community.

I guess these are the key themes that I need to cover – and at the same time revisit my own experience as a presenter, session chair or active participant in the discussion.

More blogs to come …

It just happened so that I had little chance to blog during the April month. Obviously this is due to the fact that I and my colleagues are still in a transition from our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project to successor activities. And as I have written in my previous posts, these follow-up activities need quite a lot of time for preparation – they are not merely continuation of the LL activities. I have experienced this in my initiative with the trainers (Lehrwerkmeister) of the training centre Bau-ABC on the theme ‘health and safety’ – it needs more groundwork than I expected. My ITB colleagues have experienced this in the ongoing projects and funding bids with partly new application partners and priority themes. However, we are not through with the key themes of the Learning Layers’ Construction pilot – although we have finished the final reporting quite some time ago. Now, we have a chance to revisit the project experience and draw conceptual and methodological conclusions of our work in the Construction pilot. And I have booked myself in to three conferences to have a closer look at our achievements and how review them from a conceptual point of view. Below I give brief insights into the conference papers that I am preparing at the moment.

The Stockholm International VET conference “Vocational Education and Training – Emerging Issues. Voices from Research” 8. – 9.5. 2017

The series of conferences starts with the traditional Spring conference of Stockholm University – organised on a ferry that cruises from Stockholm to Finland (the Åland island) and back. For this conference I am preparing a paper on the theme “Begleitforschung as mediator between action-oriented learning and digital change: On the role of accompanying research and training interventions in the Learning Layers Construction pilot“.

With this paper I am trying to give picture on our contribution as ‘accompanying researchers’ (Begleitforscher) in the Learning Layers’ Construction pilot – with a special emphasis of the pedagogic development of vocational training when introducing digital media. Here I make comparisons to some earlier cases of accompanying research in German pilot projects (Modellversuche) that focused on vocational schools and emphasised self-organised learning when introducing new curricular framneworks and digital media.

The Rostock International VET Conference Crossing Boundaries in Vocational Education and Training: Social Dimensions and Participation 16. – 18.8. 2017

The next milestone is the second international ‘Crossing Boundaries …’ conference (two years after the first one), now organised by the University of Rostock. For this conference I am preparing a paper on a similar theme: ‘Begleitforschung in the context of digital transformation in vocational education and training (VET): Linking work process knowledge to Industry 4.0’.

With this paper I try to follow the thread that leads from the earlier ‘Humanisation of Work’ (HdA) and ‘Work and Technology’ (AuT) programmes (with pilot projects supported by accompanying research) to present date. Here the German and European research on ‘acquisitition of work process knowledge’ and on ‘social shaping of work, technology  and organisations’ played a major role. Concerning the newer research I will explore some cases of ‘shaping-oriented’ (gestaltungsorientiert) projects that focus on ‘Industry 4.0’ as parallel cases to Learning Layers.

ECER 2017 “Reforming Education and the Imperative of Constant Change: Ambivalent roles of policy and the role of educational research” 21. – 25.8. 2017, Copenhagen

The third milestone is the annual European Conference on Educational Research (ECER) in Copenhagen – directly after the above mentioned conference in Rostock. For this conference I am preparing a paper on yet another similar theme ‘Begleitforschung revisited – Reflections on the role of accompanying research in the Learning Layers project, Construction pilot (2012 -2016)’.

This paper takes a closer look at the in-built methodological tension in accompanying research – what role is to be given on practical support for the developmental activities and what role for conceptual knowledge development beyond the particular case. Here the paper revisits the methodological self -reflection within German Begleitforschung in the 1990s and examines the process of Learning Layers’ Construction pilot with reference to frameworks and distinctions of that time – taking into account the conclusions of the two earlier papers.

– – –

I think this is enough content for a ‘ToDo-List’. Luckily enough, I am already making progress with all of them. However, there is that much reflection and rethinking involved that this work is not mere reporting in the same way as preparing ‘deliverables’ for the review panel. Therefore I am not intending to prepare a series of blogs to cover the papers in the same way as before. Each paper and conference is a case of its own and I need to take time in between. Moreover, with each conference we have different arrangements for publishing and therefore I need to find out what are the policies regarding ‘pre-publishing’ individual papers. But we shall see – time passes quickly and the first conference is already in the coming month. So, I will get back to these papers very soon.

More blogs to come …

In my two previous blogs I referred to the fact that our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project had come to an end and that we (the ITB team involved in the construction sector pilot) are working with follow-up activities. I then described briefly, how I came to start a joint initiative on digital media in the area of ‘health and safety’ (Arbeitssicherheit und Gesundheitsschutz) with trainers of the training centre Bau-ABC. In my previous post I sketched the initiative roughly. Now – after our second meeting – I can give more information and I need to reflect on lessons  learned already at this stage.

Looking back – the achievements with the Learning Layers project

Firstly I need to remind myself how this initiative drew upon the achievements of the LL project. During the project some of the trainers had created WordPress blogs to present their training contents (Project instructions, support material and worksheets) to apprentices in their trades. Then, we had piloted the integrative toolset Learning Toolbox (LTB) that had been developed during the project to support learning in the context of work. The trainers had found their ways to create stacks and tiles to support the apprentices’ projects (based on working & learning tasks). However, the transversal learning area ‘health and safety’ had not yet been covered during the project. And – moreover – from the perspective of promoting the use of LTB and digital media in construction sector, this area is important both for training centres and for construction companies. So, we started working together to conquer this terrain.

Mapping learning materials for ‘health safety’ – filling the gaps and reflecting on pedagogy

I had initially thought that we could proceed rather quickly by mapping the existing material that is being used and by analysing some options for learning software – then to start working with appropriate learning designs. But it struck me that I  had not thought of a necessary interim step – pedagogic reflection on the applicability of existing materials for the learning processes of apprentices and skilled workers. When discussing the potentially applicable learning materials the trainers informed me of several gaps to be overcome. Firstly, a lot of the reference materials are lengthy documents with detailed references to norms, standards and regulations. These, obviously, are not very easily usable in action-oriented learning (supported by digital media. Secondly, several checklists and work sheets for risk analysis (Gefährdungsbeurteilung) are designed for real work situations (involving skilled workers). However, for apprentices who are learning and working in the training centre the trainers need to develop adjusted versions. So, therefore, our initiative needed space and time – and digital tools – for such pedagogigic reflection. Furthermore, the trainers saw a possibility to shape an integrative approach that proceeds from general starting points through the main areas of construction know-how (Tiefbau, Hochbau, Ausbau) and special areas (Brunnenbau, Maschinen- und Metalltechnik) to specific trades (carpentry, bricklaying etc.) and to specific work processes (welding, sawing etc.). So, instead of taking this as an easy ‘packaging content to digital media’ exercise, we are in deep discussion on vocational learning and on appropriate ways to introduce digital media and know-how on ‘health and safety’ into working and learning processes.

– – –

I think this is enough for the moment. I have learned a lot and the trainers are pleased to work in this direction. And as far as I am concerned, this kind of process confirms once again the fundamental principles that we applied in the LL project – orientation to ‘work process knowledge’ and to ‘action-oriented learning’. Now I will have a holiday break but I am looking forward to continuing my work with the Bau-ABC trainers.

More blogs to come …

At the end of January we received the sad news that our ITB and VETNET colleague Rainer Bremer had passed away after a difficult phase with severe illnesses. Three days ago he would have celebrated his 65th birthday, but now he is gone. It has taken some time to get my thoughts together on this fact. After all, I have known Rainer since 1993 when I was still working as a junior researcher in Finland and building contacts with ITB (Institut Technik & Bildung, University of Bremen). Shortly afterwards I changed to Cedefop (European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training) and in that contexts worked together with several EU-funded projects – and Rainer was involved in some of them. Then, from 2005 I have been working in ITB and Rainer has been one of veterans of ITB who continued all these years with national, European and international projects.

Below I try to bring together some memories of Rainer from different phases of our research careers. In particular I would like to focus on our encounters in project work and in the many ECER events (European Conference on Educational Research) in which Rainer was prominently present from the early years on.

Modellversuch Schwarze Pumpe and other similar pilot projects

I learned to know Rainer shortly after he had started in ITB and in the accompanying research team of the pilot project Schwarze Pumpe (wissenschaftliche Begleitung der Modellversuch Schwarze Pumpe). This pilot project focused on promoting dually oriented qualifications – acquisition of regular vocational qualification and university entrance qualification (Fachhochschulreife) – without extension of education and training time. Rainer was responsible for accompanying the school part of the pilot, Hans-Dieter Höpfner for the workplace part, and Gerald Heidegger for the management of the accompanying research altogether.

During my first years at Cedefop I had the pleasure to attend some of the interim events of this pilot. In particular I was impressed by the integrated projects that some teams of vocational school teachers and in-company trainers had planned together – involving apprentices from different trades. And I was pleased with the way that the accompanying researchers brought these pedagogic achievements forward. In particular this was the case with nation-wide conference of similar German pilot projects, coordinated by MV Schwarze Pumpe. It struck me that Rainer (from West-Germany) and Hans-Dieter (from East-Germany) could bring together pilot projects that highlighted best practice from West and East (relatively shortly after the German unification).

European projects on parity of esteem and dually oriented qualifications

In the first phase of the EU action programme for vocational education – Leonardo da Vinci – the themes ‘parity of esteem between general and vocational education’ and ‘integrated qualifications’ were high on the priority lists. Therefore, it was no wonder that the MV Schwarze Pumpe was represented in two Leonardo projects:

• The project “Post-16 strategies” compared different systemic/institutional strategies for promoting attractiveness of vocational education and training (VET) and reducing the status gaps between VET and general education. The project came up with a mapping result that identifies four main strategies from institutional unification (intergerated upper secondary education) to enhancement of VET within existing institutional frameworks.
• The project “Intequal” provided insights into different curricular models or schemes that promoted integration of general/academic and vocational learning. This project sought to give insights into the possibilities to integrate the parallel learning cultures at the level of practical pedagogic solutions.

During their work the two projects developed close cooperation with each other – and ITB (with MV Schwarze Pumpe as its exemplary case) was prominently present in this cooperation. Rainer and Gerald rotated with each in the meetings and were involved in the bilateral study visits of ‘Post-16 strategies’ (that involved practitioners from Germany and Norway to mutual visits on each others’ pilot venues). Also, I remember the discussions in which Rainer explained to other partners the meaning of the concept ‘Beruflichkeit’ (and the kind of vocational professionalism to which it refers in German education, training and working cultures). Somehow, all other colleagues had failed to go that deep into cultural core concepts. At the end of the day the concluding event of the MV Schwarze Pumpe incorporated also a Cedefop-hosted European seminar in which the European partners could familiarise themselves with the results of the German pilot project.

The classical ITB pilot projects (Modellversuche) GoLo, GAB and GaPa

Partly parallel to the above mentioned projects, partly after them ITB experienced a period of outstanding pilot projects (Modellversuche – MV) in the context of or parallel to national innovation programs:

• The first one in the series was MV GoLo in the Wilhelmshaven region. It tried to turn the declining tendency in providing apprentice training by encouraging the companies and vocational schools to launch workplace learning partnerships. However, alongside the organisational innovations that made such cooperation attractive, the project supported joint domain-specific workshops to promote quality of vocational curricula and mutual adjustment. In this context the workshops highlighted the role of characteristic working and learning tasks (Lern- und Arbeitsaufgaben). Rainer was not personally involved in the GoLo project but he was keenly involved in the further develoment work with the concept ‘working and learning tasks’.
  
• The second one in the series was MV GAB that was implemented at different production sites of Volkswagenwerk. It had the task to develop a new integrative framework for occupational core qualifications and competences for the automotive industries. Rainer was in charge of the accompanying research team and took further steps in developing the concept of Expert-Worker-Workshops (Ex-Wo-Wos) and the curricular embedding of working and learning tasks.
• The third one, the regional MV GaPa in Nordrhein-Westfalen can be seen as a transfer-project that was built upon the regional networking approach of GoLo and on the pedagogic work in the GAB project. Rainer was in charge of the first phase of the project before moving to other tasks.

Here it is worthwhile to note that the wording ‘outstanding’ does not necessarily mean that all these pilots were success stories – or that successful practice in the pilot contexts would have been easily transferable to other contexts. Yet, they represented a phase of intensive concept development work that had an impact on many successor activities. Moreover, I need to add that Rainer had also other research interests at that time. He was developing cooperation between ITB and our friends in Oldenburg on school-to work transition. And I still remember that he had a project on integration of disadvantaged learners in VET in the area of Braunschweig.

European cooperation with projects focusing on trans-national production of Airbus and Volkswagen

After the above mentioned pilot projects Rainer worked with a new generation of pilot projects that focused on the trans-national production process of Airbus and the role of vocational education and training. Firstly there was a conceptual study EVABCOM (a conceptually and methodologically oriented forerunner project cooperation between ITB, the French CEREQ and the University of Stirling). Then two trans-national projects – AEROnet and Aero-VET brought into picture trans-national partnerships that covered the countries in which Airbus had production (Germany, France, Spain, UK). The point of interest was the contradiction between the fact that Airbus had a mutually coordinated production process BUT the VET cultures in the participating countries remained different. As I have understood it, the consortium focused in the first project on analysing the working and learning tasks of apprentices in different countries. In the second project the consortium explored the usability of European credit transfer framework (ECVET) across the countries. (Here I am not going into details of the projects or into the results – I just want to give a picture of different milestones during Rainer’s career as a European VET researcher.)

Parallel to the start of the Airbus-project Rainer had also worked with the VW Group sites in Czech Republic and Slovakia (producing Skoda) – introducing Expert-Worker-Workshops to the new sites of the VW Group. So, Rainer was working on several international fronts. And alongside his project-related cooperation he was keen on developing the bilateral relations between ITB and CEREQ (the French national centre for research on VET and labour market).

Rainer, ECER and the VETNET community

As has been indicated above, Rainer was involved in several transnational projects and consortia. Therefore, it was natural that he was also prominently present in the European Conference on Educational Research (ECER). In particular I remember his project-related contributions to ECER 2004 in Crete (the VW-Group pilots and the development of Expert-Worker-Workshops) and the subsequent AEROnet and Aero-VET related symposia in the ECER conferences after Crete.

But Rainer was also engaged as a keynote speaker and/or as a keynote panelist in the opening colloquia of the VETNET network at some ECER conferences. In particular in 2004 (in Crete) Rainer was the keynote speaker to start discussion on the question: “Should the field of VET have an international PISA study of its own kind?” There, Rainer defended the ITB position that there should be an alternative to PISA that pays attention to vocational learning and to vocational progression routes. The other panelist, Jenny Hughes from Pontydysgu presented a fundamental critique of the methodology used in PISA studies and of the PISA apparatus itself. Unfortunately the two positions couldn’t be matched with each other in the discussion – although they both represented an alternative approach vis-à-vis the official PISA. But the debate – moderated by the VETNET program chair Nikitas Patiniotis – was intensive and inspiring.

In ECER 2006, in Geneva, Rainer was also involved in the VETNET opening colloquium. This time the VETNET program chair Barbara Stalder had invited the grand old man of Swiss VET research, professor Rolf Dubs to present a keynote lecture on recent developments in Swiss VET policies and research. And as discussants, responding to the keynote speech, Barbara had engaged Annie Boudér from CEREQ and Rainer Bremer from ITB. Without going into details of that session it is worthwhile to note that ITB (in general) and Rainer (in particular) were interested in learning more of the Swiss VET culture in which apprentice training was valued much higher than in several other European countries. Also, Rainer was keen to learn more about the French concept ‘Baccalaureate professionelle’ which was considered asa successful model in opening a vocational progression route after the initial VET.

Rainer, the uneasy intellectual and independent thinker

I guess that I have already covered the main milestones of Rainer’s career as a European VET researcher (at least the ones of which I have personal memories). However, the picture would be incomplete if I wouldn’t characterise Rainer as a special personality – more than just a colleague among others. Firstly, Rainer was an academic scholar with a manifold background in philosophy, social theory and educational sciences. Secondly, Rainer had seriously worked himself in into the field of research in VET and working life – and he valued this context greatly. Thirdly, he was a critical thinker through and through – or as the Germans express it: “mit Ecken und Kanten”. So, Rainer was always looking for deep insights – something solid to build upon. And he was never satisfied with halfway thought platitudes that had not gone through critical examination. Also, he was very clear about his priorities – and on what he didn’t include to them. Yet, he had always his intellectual curiosity and his intellectual humour with him – as fellow travellers. And many colleagues remember his manifold cultural interests – literature and poetry, music from classic to pop and jazz, photography – and not to forget: driving fast with his favourite Citroen car.

Finally, I have chosen a piece of music which could be related to his memory: George Dalaras singing the melody of Mikis Theodorakis “Old streets” in the open-air concert on Athens Acropolis to celebrate the 70th birthday of the composer. (Please note that I am not responsible for eventual advertisements popping up with the link.)

We miss Rainer but we will remember, what he stood for.

Farewell Rainer, we will carry on …

In my previous post I started writing about the legacy of our recently completed EU-project Learning Layers and its Construction pilot. With this post I completed on our behalf the homework given by the reviewers of the project to produce a more compressed summary that gives an overview what was tried, achieved and learned in project work. After finishing this overarching ‘legacy document’ I needed to take a more specific look at our achievements in joint project activities with the construction sector training centre Bau-ABC Rostrup. It appeared that our ‘Impact Cases’ on the web were short of the summaries on “Main Impact”. Now that I have completed these texts I found that they should also be presented as a more detailed account of the project work in, with and for a central application partner organisation.

Use of Learning Toolbox (LTB) by Bau-ABC Trainers and Apprentices

The Learning Toolbox grew out of the co-design process of an earlier prototype called Sharing Turbine.  The initial design idea was based on the digitisation of training and learning resources for apprentice projects during their initial training. This design idea evolved during the co-design process into an integrated toolset to provide access to tools and web resources and supports real-time knowledge sharing via mobile devices.

The Learning Toolbox was then developed as an integrative toolset (mobile app container and toolkit) to support learning in the context of work. It was piloted firstly in the North German training centre Bau-ABC Rostrup to support apprentice training in the construction sector. The piloting was based on stacks created by Bau-ABC trainers for short training projects in their trades (carpentry, bricklaying, well-building, metalworking, pipeline-building). The main impacts of the pilots were the following:

• The trainers could shape their training project in a more flexible way. Some trainers developed joint projects for neighbouring trades (to highlight working interfaces). Some developed stacks with common patterns for parallel trades.
• The trainers could make more prominent use of trade-specific online resources (e.g. their own trade-specific blogs).
• The trainers could set their own accents for promoting self-organised learning among the apprentices. Some trainers emphasised problem-solving with a wide range of web resources to be searched. Others emphasised interest- and achievement-based expansion of resources that were made available in the course of learning process.

A more detailed picture of the pedagogic accents in the apprentice training is given in the Scenario document“Learning Toolbox (LTB) as Support for Action-Oriented Learning in the Apprentice Training of Bau-ABC – Instances of Change”.

Multimedia Training for and with Bau-ABC trainers

In the Learning Layers Construction pilot the project organised two Multimedia Training schemes for the training staff of the North German training centre Bau-ABC Rostrup. The first scheme was a generic Multimedia Training to support the trainers’ capability to create their trade-specific digital training and learning environments. The second scheme (the Theme Room Training) was initiated by the trainers to support wider use of digital media and web resources (and of Learning Toolbox) in Bau-ABC. The main impacts of the training schemes were the following:

• As a main result of the first Multimedia training scheme the participating core group of Bau-ABC trainers created their trade-specific blogs (Zimmererblog, Maurerblog, Tiefbaublog, Brunnenbauerblog) that they used as repositories for digital training materials.
• In the preparation of the Theme Room training the members of the core group developed themselves as peer tutors and multimedia trainers for construction sector professionals.
• In the Theme Room training all Bau-ABC trainers developed their capability to use social media, digital learning contents and digital learning tools.
• In the transition to piloting with the Learning Toolbox the members of the core group made focused use of digital learning tools (e.g. GoConqr) in their trade-specific stacks.

A more detailed insight into the Multimedia Training schemes is provided by the Methodology document “Training Interventions as Capacity-Building for Digital Transformation in Vocational Education and Training”.

– – –

I think that these short summaries (with pictures) give an overview what we achieved together in our project activities in the construction sector training centre Bau-ABC Rostrup. Based on this legacy we can work with further initiatives.

More blogs to come …

During the last four years (2012-2016) I have mainly been writing on our ‘ongoing EU-project Learning Layers’. And during the last few weeks (since November 2016) I have been writing on the final reporting of the project. My latest series of posts was about the Final Review Meeting in January 2017 in Verden. Someone might think that I have said everything that there is to be said about the completed project. Yet, I do not share that view. As a matter of fact our reviewers challenges us to do some more homework. They asked us to prepare more compressed summaries (on the work packages) on what we tried to do, what we achieved and what we learned during the project. And they asked us to link the web documents on our ‘final deliverable’ website results.learning-layers.eu. Also, the reviewers asked us to present some self-critical reflections on things that we could have done otherwise. (In my latest post I started thinking loud, what kind of answers we can give.)

Now that I have done my part of this extra homework I find it useful to present this ‘nutshell picture’ as a blog under the heading ‘Legacy of “Learning Layers” Construction Pilot”. I think that the following paragraphs give a genuine picture of what we tried to do and what we achieved – and what we learned in the Construction Pilot of the Learning Layers project.

Co-design approach and process dynamics

In the construction pilot the leading initiative in co-design work was started with the design idea of digitising training and learning materials in the training centre Bau-ABC (“Sharing Turbine”). This initiative was perceived as a key step to digitise vocational education, training and learning processes across the apprentice training in construction sector. In several iterations this design idea was transformed into the shaping of an integrative toolset (mobile app) that provides access to web resources, project documents and work- and learning-related contacts (“Learning Toolbox”). This process was shaped as a strongly user-oriented R&D dialogue that involved construction sector trainers (from Bau-ABC), technical partners (RayCom, CIMNE, Pontydysgu) and accompanying researchers (ITB).

References: The dynamics of the process and the contributions of different parties have been reported in the Methodology document “Accompanying Research and Participative Design in the Pilot Activities with the Learning Toolbox (LTB)”.

Capacity-building and training model

In the construction pilot the initial interviews brought into picture a scattered landscape of separate digital tools and apps that were not considered appropriate as support for work-related learning. Alongside co-design workshops the project organised a generic Multimedia Training Scheme to support the Bau-ABC trainers’ capability to create their trade-specific digital training and learning environments. The key results of this phase were the trainers’ blogs (Zimmererblog, Maurerblog, Tiefbaublog, Brunnenbauerblog) that they used as their trade-specific repositories for digital training materials. Later on, a broader and more construction-focused training model – the Theme Room Training – was initiated by the trainers to support the use of digital media and web resources (and of Learning Toolbox) in Bau-ABC. The Theme Room Training was implemented in 2015 by the project team and it engaged all training staff of Bau-ABC.

References: The development of the capacity-building approach and training activities has been reported in the Methodology document “Training Interventions as Capacity-Building for Digital Transformation in Vocational Education and Training”. The impact has been presented in the Impact Case “Multimedia Training for and with Bau-ABC Trainers”.

A detailed report on the planning and implementation of the Theme Room Training is provided in the Master Thesis of Jaanika Hirv for the Tallinn University:

Hirv, J. (2016). Digital Transformation: Learning Practices and Organisational Change in a Regional VET Centre. Master’s thesis, TLU.

A detailed documentation on the development of the training schemes and a digital archive of the training materials is provided in the moodle-application ITB-Moodle. The “Theme Room Training 2015”.

Piloting with Learning Toolbox and peer tutoring

As a result of the co-design and tool development work in the construction pilot the Learning Toolbox was introduced in Bau-ABC to be used in their apprentice training in selected trades. For this purpose the responsible trainers created their own stacks for the respective training projects. When the apprentices moved to training periods in neighbouring trades, the trainers created further stacks for these projects. The following trades were covered: well-building (Brunnenbau), metalworking (Metalltechnik), pipeline-building (Rohrleitungsbau), carpentry (Zimmerer), bricklaying and masonry (Maurerwerk). Trainers of carpenters and bricklayers decided to create stacks for a joint project the draws attention to a working interface of the two trades. In addition, the shop steward for health and safety (Sicherheitsbeauftragte) started to develop a specific stack for training in this field.

References: The measures to introduce the Learning Toolbox into apprentice training in Bau-ABC and the immediate impact have been reported in the Impact Case “Use of Learning Toolbox by Bau-ABC Trainers and Apprentices”.

Insights into pedagogic approaches of trainers and learning behaviour of apprentices are provided in the Scenario document “Learning Toolbox (LTB) as Support for Action-Oriented Learning in Vocational Education and Training (VET)”.

Outreach activities and engagement of further users

Alongside the co-design and pilot testing activities the construction pilot has organised outreach activities to engage further users of the Learning Toolbox. Most of these contacts have led to very focused trade- and company-specific negotiations. A generic use case has been documented on the basis of Thomas Isselhard’s work as a construction site manager in Verden. Based on a workshop for craft trade companies (and on the presentation of Thomas Isselhard) the construction pilot outlined a scenario for craft trade companies and their collaboration with planners, authorities and parallel trades.

References: The model of using Learning Toolbox to coordinate the work of planners and different craft trade teams has been presented in the Scenarios and Models document “Learning Toolbox as Support for Organisational Learning and Cooperation at a Construction Site in Verden – Instances of Change”.

The presentation of Thomas Isselhard’s has been recorded on two videos:

Video 1: LTB at Use on Construction Site in Verden – Thomas Isselhard’s Presentation

Video 2: LTB at Use by Companies – Discussion after Thomas Isselhard’s Presentation

Lessons learned

Concerning the strategic choices regarding co-design processes (to develop new tools to be tested and deployed during the project) vs. diffusion processes (to select existing mature tools to be piloted as a alternative or complementary action) the construction pilot team has concluded:

1. The needs and expectations of the application partners could only have been met via participative co-design processes. Likewise, the capacity-building measures alongside the co-design were crucial to equip construction sector users with necessary digital competences.
2. The co-design approach (to develop a flexible and integrative toolset “Learning Toolbox”) would have enabled earlier piloting with existing multimedia tools (to be integrated to the Learning Toolbox). Such complementary piloting in Bau-ABC would have been useful in the intermediate period between the two training schemes and as a preparation for the introduction of the Learning Toolbox.
3. Complementary piloting with existing tools (alongside co-design of Learning Toolbox) could have been used as bridging measures to involve interested construction companies in pilot activities. Now the engagement of companies started only when the Learning Toolbox was ready for piloting.

– – –

I think this is enough of the general picture of Construction pilot and of the legacy of the intensive project years 2012-2016. However, in this context I have had a special chance to review the cooperation of our project team with our application partner organisation Bau-ABC Rostrup and the impact of our activities. I will focus on this in my next post.

More blogs to come …

In my two previous posts I have started a series of posts on the concluding event of our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project – the Final Review. In the first post I explained how we came to the idea to organise the event primarily at the Norddeutsches Zentrum für Nachhaltiges Bauen ((NZNB) – North-German Centre for Ecological Construction Work in Verden, near Bremen).  I then gave a picture of the arrangements on site and on the special agenda of Review Meeting (with interactive exhibition spaces as addition to traditional presentations). In the second post I focused on the contributions of the Construction Pilot – on our topics and how we presented our message (with poster wall, exploitation tables and presentation session). In this third post I will focus on the comparisons between the Construction pilot and Healthcare pilot that I and Tamsin Treasure-Jones presented as tandem-presenters. (In the agenda this was labelled with the title “Future of Learning in digital transformation of SMEs” – led by Graham Attwell. Here I will focus on our reflections on the two sectoral pilots and on our conclusions from cross-sectoral comparison.)

Interests, obstacles and challenges for digital transformation in the pilot sectors

Looking back at the project start we presented the following interests, obstacles and challenges that had a role in promoting or preveing digital transformation in the pilot sectors:

In the Construction sector:

• Productivity of workforce was emphasised by the representatives of the umbrella organisation of the construction industry (Bauindustrieverband) as a major source of innovation to be be explored.
• Several pioneering enterprises had introduced earlier digital tools but made negative experiences with non-mature technologies and less user-friendly software solutions.
• Most construction companies had very restrictive policies regarding the use of mobile devices at construction sites – partly to avoid hazards due to lack of concentration, partly to ensure data protection and data privacy.
• Most apprentices were not familiar with domain-specific apps and had mainly used to digital tools and Internet for private hobbies and interests.

In the Healthcare sector:

• The pilot contexts were overshadowed by high workloads and high stakes. Therefore, time for reflection and learning was limited. Readiness for innovations was available, if one could foresee quick wins. The management representatives and staff were wary of technology that is not yet robust or fit for purpose.
• There was an increasing emphasis to have more collaboration (between teams and SMEs in healthcare) but this tended to create new demands on staff time, information overload and slow down decision making.
• In  the SMEs usage of digital technology was limited due to lack of WiFi and reliance on traditional desktop computing.

Co-design, capacity-building and user engagement in the pilot sectors

Looking back at the activities in the two sectoral pilots, we can summarise the somewhat different developments in the following way:

In the construction sector:

• Participative Research & Development dialogue was primarily promoted in one central application partner organisation (Bau-ABC). It involved users (trainers & apprentices) and technical partners but was kept together by a supporting accompanying research team.
• The co-design process was based on preliminary idea that was revised in an iterative process that prepared the grounds for shaping an integrative and flexible mobile toolset. During this process the Multimedia training schemes had a bridging role in carrying the process to next phases and in promoting the users’ web competences for the piloting.
• Wider stakeholder engagement served the purpose of promoting the idea of an integrative toolset and getting new impulses and feedback for the co-design.

Co-design, capacity-building and user-engagement in healthcare:

• Co-design process was shaped with three parallel design teams – involving different sets of users, researchers and software developers from different countries and organisations.
• In general the activities were based on Design-Based Research process model and on several iterations. At the final phase of the processes they were reaching the stage of partial integration of originally separate tools.
• Training was built in into co-design and pilot activities but it couldn’t integrate the pilot groups and bridge the gaps.
• Pilots were extended to wider groups when initial user groups (involved in the design teams) encountered difficulties in making actual use of the tools in the context of work. Wider stakeholder engagement served the purpose of opening the piloting beyond the original co-design teams.

 Signs of transformative practice in the two sectoral pilots

Looking at the experiences in co-design, capacity building and using the tools in the two sectoral pilots, we can summarise the achievements as ‘signs of transformative learning’ in the following way:

In the construction sector

• The Bau-ABC trainers’ work with their own domain-specific blogs and their project-specific stacks for Learning Toolbox helped them to create ownership of digital tools and confidence to use them. Likewise, the apprentices accepted the use of digital tools and web resources as welcomed enrichment of their learning practices.
• Some Bau-ABC trainers used Learning Toolbox as an instrument to plan integrated training projects. In this way they could address working interfaces at construction. From the perspective of productivity and energy-efficiency these interfaces (e.g. in the work of bricklayers and carpenters) are of vital importance. Here the engagement of the two trades in joint projects (which require familiarisation in the other trade’s tasks) can be seen as a major step in  developing collaborative projects of different trades.
• The presentation of Thomas Isselhard on Learning Toolbox in the coordination of work at a construction site (see Video 1 and Video 2) give a clear picture of the advantages of using Learning Toolbox by different parties.
• Yet, the positive examples referred to need to be seen as ‘instances of change’ which require further support by management decisions and by engagement of further users (see the next point below).

In the healthcare sector

• The workshops of the Healthcare pilots also managed to create ownership through co-design – such as the participants’ engagement with “our Bits & Pieces” applications.
• The workshops facilitated moving from a culture of cooperative (externally coordinated) to collaborative (mutually coordinated) work – overcoming fears around change of own & others’ work.
• The pilot activities enabled a wider group to act as developers of new ideas, not only as reviewers (of the usability of the tools).
• Yet, the above mentioned  learning experiences in the project activities were not enough to overcome the hurdles in the organisational everyday life (see the next point below).

Lessons from the project work (altogether) in the two sectoral pilots

Lessons from construction pilot

• Major part of the co-design, capacity-building and piloting activities took place in the training centre Bau-ABC. It was relatively easy to integrate the activities into the training projects. Also, given its various training activities Bau-ABC was in a position act as a multiplier-organisation in its various networks. This is also the case with the Verden-based Netzwerk Nachhaltiges Bauen ((NNB) – Network for Ecological Construction Work).
• In the pilot activities the Learning Toolbox proved to be a flexible toolset that could be easily customised to support trade-specific learning as well as coordination of construction work at construction site.
• Concerning the roll-out to construction companies, it has been essential to demonstrate the Learning Toolbox at the stage of ‘working tool in action’ to get construction companies start their own pilots. These, however require a greater degree of customisation and integration of ‘learning’ with the optimisation company-specific work and business processes.

Lessons from healthcare pilot

• Major part of the co-design, capacity-building and piloting took place in General Practice stations – in which there was less time and space for introducing new tools and practices in the middle of daily work. In the exploitation phase it became clear that organisations that are responsible for education/training of healthcare professionals are in a better position to start the initial piloting.
• The pilot activities in Healthcare sector focused on tools that were designed for collaborative use (across the organisation or particular networks or teams). It appeared that in many cases there was a risk of ending up with parallel processes (for those using the tools and those not getting involved) and therefore the use of tools could not be established as a general practice. In this respect the use of Learning Toolbox has been less dependent on the number of users within the organisation.
• Also in the exploitation activities in Healthcare sector it has been important to have examples from using the tools in real work settings to facilitate transfer of innovation beyond the original contexts (the organisations involved in co-design activities).

– – –

I believe that this is enough of the comparisons between the two sectors. In my next post I will give a picture on the questions raised by our presentations, on the related discussion and on the feedback from reviewers.

More blogs to come …