Both public discourses and educational policy interventions in European countries and beyond are concerned with improving the quality of education. One key orientation in analyzing and acting for better quality is to move a bit away from structural changes, mainly situated at system level and to a large extent regulatory-based (i.e. competency-based curricula, qualification frameworks, quality assurance standards and mechanisms etc.) towards a more process-oriented approach, concerned with quality of learning as it happens in the classroom and outside formal settings (quality of interactions of learning actors, authenticity of learning experiences, behavioral patters in adopting policy changes etc.). Without neglecting certain legitimacy of structural - systemic policy interventions, the assumption of our research is that an important factor leading to learning deficits is the de-contextualization of learning experiences as they are designed and implemented in our schools. Our hypothesis is that there is a consistent difference in understanding authentic learning experiences (meaningful contents, relevant skills, productive learning interactions,  etc.) among learners and their teachers, and, as a consequence, a somehow “parallel” and non-effective learning process in which each party is expecting something else (or blaming) the other.
We made an investigation of a sample of Romanian high schools students (10th to 12th grade, aged +16 years old) which already spent at least one year in this form of upper secondary education and their teachers in order to see what are the key differences and / or similarities in understanding authentic learning and playing roles in facilitating constructive environments and experiences for it. There are two key perspectives of analyzing the results of the research. One is the theoretical and methodological movement in the pedagogical literature towards authenticity of learning processes and learning innovation, conceptualized by different authors, among which Stein, Isaacs & Andrews (2004), Tochon (2000), Bocconi, Kampylis & Punie (2012), Hannon (2009), Claxton (2004, 2008) or Herrington (2003, 2006), very much situated and process-oriented. The second perspective, correlated in our opinion with the first, is related to the role and especially type of policy interventions (and mainly policy tools) used by decision-makers that facilitates conditions for authentic learning. The social and behavioral patterns on what is learning and how learning should occur are shaping to a large extent both the policy initiatives (strategic steering framework) and instructional design (learning experience framework) and these patterns can be identified (and eventually challenged) based on the way teachers and their students conceptualize learning in general and authentic learning in special.
Although the subjects of our sample are only from Romania, important lessons for countries facing similar learning deficits at this level could be learned. Based on the research results, we will try to identify a framework for appropriate policy initiatives to support authentic learning (mainly at the level of teacher education and management of educational time), but also how it transfers at the level of creating conditions for authentic learning experiences by designing innovative an learning scenarios embedded in the learning context / situation.

Bocconi, S., Kampylis, P.G. & Punie, Y. (2012). Innovating Learning: Key Elements for Developing Creative Classrooms in Europe. JRC Scientific and Policy Reports. EUR 25446. Luxembourg: Publication Office of the European Union. Borthwick, F, Bennett, Lefoe, G.E. & Huber, E. (2007). Applying authentic learning to social science: A learnig design for an inter-disciplinary sociology subject. In: Learning Design, 2(1), p. 14-24. Claxton, G.; Carr, M. (2004). A Framework for Teaching Learning: the dynamics of disposition. Early Years, 24,1, p.87-97. Hannon, V. (2009). ‘Only Connect!’: A new paradigm for learning innovation in the 21st century. CSE Occasional Papers Series 112. Melbourne: Centre for Strategic Education. Herrington, A., & Herrington, J. (Eds.) (2006). Authentic learning environments in higher education. Hershey, PA: Infosci. Ashford-Rowe, K., Herrington, J. and Brown, C. (2014) Establishing the critical elements that determine authentic assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39 (2). pp. 205-222. Leppisaari, I., Herrington, J., Vainio, L. and Im, Y. (2013) Authentic e-Learning in a multicultural context: Virtual benchmarking cases from five countries. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 24 (1). pp. 53-73. Parker, J., Maor, D. and Herrington, J. (2013) Authentic online learning: Aligning learner needs, pedagogy and technology. Issues in Educational Research, 23 (2). pp. 227-241. Herrington, J. and Parker, J. (2013) Emerging technologies as cognitive tools for authentic learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44 (4). pp. 607-615. Pal, L. (2005). Beyond Policy Analysis. Public Issue Management in Turbulent Times. Thomson / Nelson. Schneider, A.; Ingram, H. (1990). Behavioral Assumptions of Policy Tools. In: The Journal of Politics. 52, 2, p.510-529. Stein, S. J., Isaacs, G., & Andrews, T. (2004). Incorporating authentic learning experiences within a university course. Studies in Higher Education, 29 (2), 239.258. Tochon, F.V. (2000). When authentic experiences are “enminded” into disciplinary genres: crossing biographic and situated knowledge. In: Learning and Instruction. Vol. 10, 4. p.331–359. Visser, J., Visser, Y.L (2000). On the Difficulty of Changing Our Perceptions About Such Things as Learning. The Meaning of Learning Project, Learning Development Institute Presidential Session at AECT, Denver, October 25-28, 2000.