VETNET

I have spent some  time after the ECER'05 preparing a project proposal for the EU programme Leonardo da Vinci. As things stand now, this call of proposals was to be the last one. However, there are some major question marks that overshadow the transition from the current programme generation to the next one (which should be started in the year 2007).

At this point it is worthwhile to consider the relative importance of the European cooperation programmes of EU for the development of VETNET. This question immediately triggers the question, how the VETNET community could (or should) consider itself as a contributor  to European policy development in the field of VET. This latter question is related to a further question on the possible contribution of research to VET-related policy development at the European level.

These issues have been coming up in the joint VETNET events of the recent ECER-conferences. In particular at ECER'03 in Hamburg  there were several sessions to launch a debate and to support emerging initiatives (notably the panel dscussion in the VETNET Opening colloquium and the public debate in the VETNET Open meeting).

The joint VETNET programme for ECER´05 included two joint plenary sessions. The first one (the Opening Colloquium) was based on the keynote lecture of James Wickham and discussed the European dimension of education, training and the socio-economic environment at the level of megatrends and 'big pictures'. (See the respective blog entries by myself and by Graham Attwell below and the documentation of the session on the ECER 2005 sessions pages.)

The second joint session was named as the "VETNET Research Forum" and it had been given the heading "Setting the European VET research agenda". The session was focusing on the recent European study "Attainment of the Lisbon Goals: The contribution of VET". The study was funded by the European Commission. It provided the background material for preparing the policy documents for the Maastricht meeting of the European ministers responsible for VET at the end of the year 2004. The aim of the study(latterly known as the "Maastricht study") was to provide an interim assessment on the progress with the Lisbon goals (to transform Europe into the leading global innovation area  by 2010) in the field of VET. The study was carried out by a consortium that consisted of eight national agencies and of some affiliated research institutes.

The plenary session of VETNET research forum in Dublin was based on two inputs by members of the consortium and on a reflective commentary by an invited expert. At present it is not possible for me to give a detailed account on the contents of the three speeches. (I would prefer to have a closer look at the slides and at the written papers - which we hope to get to the VETNET page very soon). In general terms I would characterise the division of labour between the three speakers in the following way:

• The coordinator of the consortium, Tom Leney from the Qualification and Curriculum Authority (QCA), UK, put the study into a European policy context. He then analysed the given working space (and the possibilities to readdress the issues from the researchers' poin of view)  from this perspective.
• The other member of the consortium, Anneke Westerhuis, from the Dutch national agency Cinop analysed the preconditions for preparing the study on sufficently grounded materials and with a sufficient degree of commonality across different countries.
• The reflective commentary of professor Felix Rauner (ITB, University of Bremen) made critical contrasts between the issues that are being brought forward by current policy processes and the ones (more specific to VET) that tend to be left to the margins.

Concerning the participation of the audience - and concerning the possible conclusions to be drawn from the debate - there were some fundamental difficulties that remained unresolved:

1. To what extent was the discussion supposed to be a debate on the role of research and its role in the European policy development and to what extent on the policy development itself? The example of the Maastricht study shows that these issues are very closely related to each other?
2. To what extent could the exemplary case (the Maastricht study) provide new insights into researchers' involvement in policy monitoring? In this context it is worthwhile to note that it is not certain how the experiences with this study (undertaken 2004) will be taken into account when preparing the next one (to be undertaken in 2006).
3. To what extent can VETNET draw conclusions from this particular exemplary case for its own discussion on the future European VET research agendas? As things stand now, there are no specific VETNET activities that would bring the issues that are central for such studies to a broader discussion within the European VET research community. Furthermore, there are no clear models or arenas for a more effective VETNET particpation in such European-level debates that lead to the shaping and setting of European VET research agendas.

I stop my comment on the session to this point. I hope that I have raised an issue that has to be tackled in the near future - even if the rocky road from Dublin is no longer that strongly present in our minds. However, I personally do feel the need to refresh my memories on some thematic sessions of ECER'05. 

Pekka Kämäräinen