Reports and Messages from ECER'06 in Geneva, Part VII: Second thoughts on the VETNET programme, looking forward to ECER'07 in Ghent
26-September-2006
permalink email thisThe blog series "Reports and message from ECER'06" consists of brief reports and recollections on selected VETNET sessions at ECER'06. The seventh and last report of this series discusses the development of the VETNET programme and raises some issues for the preparation of the next conference.
In the previous postings I have presented insights into the VETNET programme of the ECER'06 conference and analysed the contributions. Now, with the last posting of this series it is time to consider how the VETNET community has developed with this programme. Also, it is appropriate to rause the question, what challenges the most recent conference experience provides for the future development of VETNET.
Firstly, I have often referred to VETNET as the umbrella community of European VET researchers. In a similar way I have characterised the VETNET programme at ECER as the central platform for sharing knowledge current VET research in Europe. This has not always been that evidently the case and this cannot be taken as granted. This has been an achievement of the earlier community-building processes and it requires further attention when preparing the future activities.
The reason for the popularity of the VETNET network has been the fact that it has been perceived as the "common European house" for all VET researchers. It has invited researchers with academic background in social and educational sciences as well as in vocational disciplines. It has invited researchers with thematic interests in VET policies, educational processes, learning behaviour and social consequences. Moreover, VETNET has been open for different methodological preferences and for cross-cultural cooperation.
However, given this diversity and given the proncipal acceptance of each other into the same working neighbourhood, there have been some tensions that have come up on different occasions. One point of consideration has been, whether to accept only 'end results' or whether to give room for contributions that present 'work in progress'. Another issue is whether to accept only 'primary results' or whether to accept sessions that focus on 'analysis of research' or 'learning within research projects'. These issues highlight the fact that different members of the VETNET community may have different quality criteria in their mind.
One aspect of importance for VETNET has been the possibility to accommodate symposia or round table that have been based on trans-national cooperation projects. In the best cases these sessions have contributed to cross-project dialogue and to knowledge enrichment across parallel initiatives. However, there has always been a risk that such sessions carry on the internal discussion that is relevant for the respective phase of the project. Therefore, there is a need to consider, what modes of work (round table, workshop or symposium) should be chosen and what is the contribution to the broader audience. (In this respect we have to learn to reconsider this question time and again.)
One of the key issues that has been addressed time and again whether VETNET should try to structure the programme into thematic strands that would give certain constant themes (like work-related learning) a specific continuity in the programme and reduce clashes between parallel sessions. On the one hand there has been a fear of compartmentalisation of the programme (and of the community). On the other hand there are views that working with such strands could be helpful for promoting joint publishing and networking after the conferences.
In the recent time there has been some discussion how to use the joint VETNET sessions (Opening Colloquium, VETNET Forum) as special platforms for discussing common concerns and addressing new challenges. In this respect some experiences have already been made with different sessions. Yet, these sessions are still looking at their proper role as stimuli for the whole programme and for the work after the conference.
Finally, it is worthwhile to note that the ECER'07 in Ghent can be considered as the 10-year milestone for VETNET programmes at ECER. In this respect there is a need to consoder how VETNET could learn from its own history. Yet, parallel to this, there is a challenge to present the readiness of the European VET research community for the new era of European cooperation and exchanges.
Pekka Kämäräinen
Firstly, I have often referred to VETNET as the umbrella community of European VET researchers. In a similar way I have characterised the VETNET programme at ECER as the central platform for sharing knowledge current VET research in Europe. This has not always been that evidently the case and this cannot be taken as granted. This has been an achievement of the earlier community-building processes and it requires further attention when preparing the future activities.
The reason for the popularity of the VETNET network has been the fact that it has been perceived as the "common European house" for all VET researchers. It has invited researchers with academic background in social and educational sciences as well as in vocational disciplines. It has invited researchers with thematic interests in VET policies, educational processes, learning behaviour and social consequences. Moreover, VETNET has been open for different methodological preferences and for cross-cultural cooperation.
However, given this diversity and given the proncipal acceptance of each other into the same working neighbourhood, there have been some tensions that have come up on different occasions. One point of consideration has been, whether to accept only 'end results' or whether to give room for contributions that present 'work in progress'. Another issue is whether to accept only 'primary results' or whether to accept sessions that focus on 'analysis of research' or 'learning within research projects'. These issues highlight the fact that different members of the VETNET community may have different quality criteria in their mind.
One aspect of importance for VETNET has been the possibility to accommodate symposia or round table that have been based on trans-national cooperation projects. In the best cases these sessions have contributed to cross-project dialogue and to knowledge enrichment across parallel initiatives. However, there has always been a risk that such sessions carry on the internal discussion that is relevant for the respective phase of the project. Therefore, there is a need to consider, what modes of work (round table, workshop or symposium) should be chosen and what is the contribution to the broader audience. (In this respect we have to learn to reconsider this question time and again.)
One of the key issues that has been addressed time and again whether VETNET should try to structure the programme into thematic strands that would give certain constant themes (like work-related learning) a specific continuity in the programme and reduce clashes between parallel sessions. On the one hand there has been a fear of compartmentalisation of the programme (and of the community). On the other hand there are views that working with such strands could be helpful for promoting joint publishing and networking after the conferences.
In the recent time there has been some discussion how to use the joint VETNET sessions (Opening Colloquium, VETNET Forum) as special platforms for discussing common concerns and addressing new challenges. In this respect some experiences have already been made with different sessions. Yet, these sessions are still looking at their proper role as stimuli for the whole programme and for the work after the conference.
Finally, it is worthwhile to note that the ECER'07 in Ghent can be considered as the 10-year milestone for VETNET programmes at ECER. In this respect there is a need to consoder how VETNET could learn from its own history. Yet, parallel to this, there is a challenge to present the readiness of the European VET research community for the new era of European cooperation and exchanges.
Pekka Kämäräinen
Linking and trackbacks
When linking to this weblog entry, please use the 'permalink', which is http://www.vet-research.net/collaborate/ecer_blog/entries/1148001753
