Description:

To follow-up previous works on learning environments, e.g. discussions in VETNET, on paths between learning environments; like workplace training and classroom training. Link this discussion to the theme of validation of non-formal and informal competences and to ongoing policy work of the European Union on dissemination and exploitation of results from Community programmes, like 'Leonardo da Vinci' in the field of vocational training. Reflections on the utility of the notion 'valorisation' of project results and on similarities between national and transnational training projects. Reflections on the involvement of and contribution from stakeholder groups, like agencies for validation of prior learning and the social partners.

Methodology or methods/research instruments or sources used:

Analysis of semi-structured interviews with learners and project coordinators carried out during the evaluation of a Norwegian LLL programme. Analysis of documentation from DG Education and Culture on dissemination and exploitation (=valorisation) of project results.On this basis; a comparison between dissemination and exploitation of results from Norwegian workplace training projects with vocational training projects in the frame of the EU programme 'Leonardo da Vinci'.

Conclusions or expected outcomes or findings:

Appraisals of the Norwegian LLL reform and efforts of the European Commission in valorising training projects point in the same direction: a sound dissemination and exploitation of public funded projects will better benefit learners when workplace training and classroom training are conciliated. An important tool in this conciliation is the translation of workplace experiences into a form that accreditation agencies can assess. Also, it seems important that stakeholder groups are sufficiently involved in bringing forward and translating learning experiences into new contexts. Taking the Norwegian social partners as an example, it appears that a thorough mobilisation of employers' and employees' representatives at all organisational levels could have contributed to a more successful valorisation of learning experiences and project results.

References:

• Final Report from the European Commission on the Implementation of the First Phase of the Community Action Programme Leonardo da Vinci (1995-1999). COM(2000) 863 final, Brussels, 2.12.2000. (EC 2000).
• E. Døving, O.B. Ure, S. Skule: Evaluering av Kompetanseutviklingsprogrammet. Underveisrapport 2004. http://www.fafo.no/pub/rapp/751/index.htm
• E. Døving, O. B. Ure et al.: Evaluering av Kompetanseutviklingsprogrammet. Underveisrapport 2005. http://www.fafo.no/pub/rapp/784/784.pdf
• C. H. Jørgensen: Connecting work and education: should learning be useful, correct or meaningful? Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 16, No. 8, 2004, pp. 455 - 465.
• J. Payne: What progress is Norway making with lifelong learning? A study of the Norwegian competence reform. Research paper 55, June 2005. SKOPE publication, Oxford and Warwick Universities.
• O. B. Ure, B. K. Teige: The role of social partners in lifelong learning reforms for employability. Observations from Spain, the UK and Norway. Research paper to workshop of the EU 5FP project Eurone&t, Oslo, June 2003 (unpublished).

Extended Abstract:

Background :

The classroom and the workplace are often considered as two major learning environments. In spite of favourable appreciations of dual apprenticeships systems and of vocational education in general, there is a tendency to consider Classroom Training (CT) and Workplace Training (WT) as opposites. The introduction of supplementary notions, like technical-organisational and socio-cultural learning environment, can bring together these apparently opposite notions (cf. C.H. Jørgensen; 2004).

A complementary rapprochement can be obtained through validation of prior learning, entailing translation of WT into CT, and often sanctioned by the formal education system. This process is parallel to the efforts currently made by the European Commission on disseminating and exploiting results from EU programmes, notably in the field of education and training. While leaning on ongoing work on dissemination and exploitation, chaired by DG Education and Culture , we will in this article use data from the evaluation of an ambitious Norwegian lifelong learning (LLL) reform in order to illustrate some interfaces between learning environments. If stakeholder groups like the social partners become deeply involved, more such interfaces might occur.

The Norwegian Competence Development Programme and European training projects A fundamental aim of the Norwegian programme was to spur WT. After a considerable workplace mobilisation, more than 600 experimental projects were subsidized from the public purse and supervised by the social partners, which wanted to harvest experiences for their own policy-making and as a platform for subsequent dissemination. CT was an integral part in many projects and was, in most cases, a necessary condition for passing an exam leading to accredited learning.

Some projects in the Norwegian pulp and paper industry illustrate that the workplace could be used in order to illustrate theoretical issues in the curricula. This lowered the dropout rate, in particular among workers with little formal education and among elderly workers (Døving, Ure et al., 2005). Hence, for workers undergoing training leading to a formal exam it was insufficient only to relate training to their workplace and to be offered on-the-job training; theoretical issues had to be illustrated in the context of their workplace. Departing from these observations we will sketch a 'hierarchy' of how the workplace is being used for learning purposes.

Our ongoing evaluation of the Norwegian LLL reform indicates that it started out as a mobilisation of WT but soon faced the challenge of disseminating and exploiting project results. Within individual projects, it soon appeared essential not only to make use of the workplace for learning purposes, but also to put training leading to informal competences on an equal footing with formal competences. In other words, there was a need for mechanisms or procedures for valorising WT.

A first step could be to pay attention to dissemination and exploitation (= 'valorisation') at an early stage of the projects. Interviews made for the evaluation of the reform show that valorisation of the results was a minor concern in the experimental projects launched during the first years of the LLL reform (Døving, Ure, Skule; 2004). At this point our diagnosis is similar to what can be read in the evaluation of the first phase of the EU programme for vocational training, Leonardo da Vinci (cf. EC; 2000). The subsequent evaluations of European training programmes also demonstrate that valorisation of learning experiences has to be supported because dissemination and exploitation of project results does not appear as natural by-products from learning partnerships. Moreover, the idea that social partners could be a vehicle in disseminating results from the Norwegian LLL reform, proved to be very optimistic (Ure, Teige; 2003).

INTERACTIONS BETWEEN LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS IN VET. A contribution to conceptual frameworks for Classroom Training and Workplace Training

Preview Info - paper-ECER-2006-22-sept.doc - 166.00 Kb

This is a slightly revised version of the paper presented at VetNet during ECER-06.