Workplace Learning: How to get Evidence on the Quality of Initial Vocational Education and Training

Author(s):

Christof NägeleBarbara E. StalderJuergen SeifriedAndreas Rausch

Conference:

ECER 2009

Network:

2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)

Format:

Research Workshop

Session Information

02 SES 09 C, Workplace Learning: How to get Evidence on the Quality of Initial Vocational Education and Training

Research Workshop

Time:

2009-09-30

10:30-12:00

Room:

HG, HS 26

Chair:

Christof Nägele

Contribution

Although a growing amount of theoretical frameworks on workplace learning has emerged (Marsick & Watkins, 2001; Billett, 2001), there is still a lack of empirical research in this field (De Jong, 1996; Beck, 2005). One of the reasons is the difficult access to the empirical field, i.e. finding companies willing to cooperate in elaborate research projects. In this research workshop we will address the question on how to measure the quality of workplace learning and identify its influencing factors by examples of running and planned research projects. Based on a system-perspective working environments can be described as nested systems of different levels (Bronfenbrenner, 1990). The structure of vocational education and training (VET) in different countries varies considerably due to economical, legal, and cultural parameters (macro-level). In the dual system of VET as in Germany or Switzerland a large part of VET is assigned to the workplace. But participation in working processes does not necessarily lead to learning processes, as learning goals might be in conflict with working goals. Comparative studies on motivation and quality evaluation repeatedly show that trainees appreciate work settings more than school settings (Wild & Krapp, 1996; Prenzel, Kramer & Drechsel, 2002; Stalder, 2003; Dubs, 2005). Studies vary in the extent of clarifying the influencing factors that cause variance in motivation and learning results. Not only does VET vary on macro-level, there is also substantial heterogeneity of learning potentials in workplace settings due to vocation, branch, enterprise size, work organisation, educational staff, training concepts etc. (meso-level). On a micro-level of learning processes in the workplace variables such as assigned work tasks (scope of action/job control, complexity etc., Hacker, 2005), provided support (explanation, help, feedback etc., Baeriswyl, Wandeler & Oswald, 2006), and social context (Nägele, 2008) should be considered as well as trainees’ individual traits (personality, interests, biographical data etc.). As most apprenticeship positions are offered by small and medium sized enterprises, each offering only a limited number of apprenticeship positions in varying vocations, empirical results on micro-level are always biased by meso-level influences. This raises questions on the data quality, comparability, and statistical issues. Although the workshop focuses on research methods on the micro-level of workplace learning, influences on the meso- and macro-level must be controlled, at least if samples are assumed to show variance on these levels.

Method

Most research on workplace learning employs retrospective evaluations via questionnaire that allow big sample sizes mostly within cross-sectional research designs, but also seems problematic because of the tacit nature of workplace learning (Berings, Doornbos & Simons, 2006). Interview methods allow going more into detail, but often remain limited to small sample sizes. Furthermore ethnographical studies (participative observations) on the one hand deliver valuable insights in working processes (Lave & Wenger, 1991), but on the other hand suffer from subjectivity and intense time requirements. Research on the micro-level must consider „objective“ conditions (i.e. video studies) as well as trainees‘ subjective experience in the workplace (i.e. experience sampling method) (Hektner, Schmidt & Csikszentmihalyi, 2007, Sembill et al., 2007). While the latter has also been done in workplace settings, video studies are unusual because of data secrecy. Alternative approaches might be seen in diary methods (Keck, 1995; Rausch, Thiel & Mayer, 2007).

Expected Outcomes

Four interrelated outcomes of this research workshop are expected: (1) Discussing and refining theoretical frameworks that help to find precise terminologies and clarify hypothesised interactions between the relevant constructs. (2) Finding effective and efficient methods to measure the relevant constructs of workplace learning. (3) Developing research designs incorporating several methods that allow testing hypothesised models. (4) Evaluation of feasibility, i.e. to gain access to the empirical field.

References

Baeriswyl, F., Wandeler, Ch. & Oswald, K. (2006). Die Ausbildungskonzeptionen von betrieblichen Ausbildenden – Schlussbericht des Teilprojektes Freiburg. Freiburg. Beck, K. (2005). Ergebnisse und Desiderate zur Lehr-Lern-Forschung in der kaufmännischen Berufsausbildung. Zeitschrift für Berufs- und Wirtschaftspädagogik, 101(4), 533-556. Berings, G. M. C., Doornbos, A. J. & Simons, P. R. J. (2006). Methodological practices in on-the-job learning research. Human resource development international, 9(3), 333-363. Billett, S. (2001). Learning at the workplace. Strategies for effective practice. Crows Nest, Australie: Allen & Unwin. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1990). Ökologische Sozialisationsforschung. In L. Kruse, C.-F. Graumann & E.-D. Lantermann (Hrsg.): Ökologische Psychologie – Ein Handbuch in Schlüsselbegriffen (pp. 76-79). München: Psychologie Verlags Union. De Jong, Jeroen A. (1996). Research into On-the-job Training: A State of the Art. International Journal of Educational Research, 25(5), 449-464. Dubs, R. (2005). Gutachten zu Fragen der schweizerischen Berufsbildung. Bern: h.e.p Verlag AG. Hacker, W. (2005). Allgemeine Arbeitspsychologie: Psychische Regulation von Wissens-, Denk- und körperlicher Arbeit. Bern: Huber. Hektner, J. M., Schmidt, J. A. & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2007). Experience Sampling Method - Measuring the Quality of Everyday Life. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: Sage Publications. Keck, A. (1995). Zum Lernpotential kaufmännischer Arbeitssituationen. Göttingen: Dissertation an der Universität Göttingen. Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning – Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambrigde, New York, Port Chester, Melbourne, Sydney: Cambridge University Press. Marsick, Victoria J. & Watkins, Karen E. (2001). Informal and Incidental Learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2001(89), 25-34. Nägele, C. (2008). Work Design, Social Climate and their Connection to Work-placed Learning. Paper presented at the ECER 2008 Gothenburg, The European Conference on Educational Research in Gothenburg, Sweden, Theme: From Teaching to Learning. 8 - 9 September 2008, VET-Net. Prenzel, M., K., Klaudia & Drechsel, B. (2002). Self-Determined and Interested Learning in Vocational Education. In K. Beck (Hrsg.): Teaching-Learning Processes in Vocational Education. Foundations of Modern Training Programmes (pp. 43-68). Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, Bern, Bruxelles, New York, Oxford, Wien: Peter Lang. Rausch, A., Thiel, K. & Mayer, L. (2007). Lernen am Arbeitsplatz – Wie erleben Auszubildende im Einzelhandel ihre tägliche Arbeit? In: Wirtschaft und Erziehung, 59(7-8), S. 238-244. Sembill, D., Wuttke, E., Seifried, J., Egloffstein, M., & Rausch, A. (2007). Selbstorganisiertes Lernen in der beruflichen Bildung – Abgrenzungen, Befunde und Konsequenzen [Self-organised learning in vocational education – boundaries, findings and consequences]. Abgerufen Dezember 22, 2008, von http://www.bwpat.de/ausgabe13/sembill_etal_ bwpat13.pdf. Stalder, B. E. (2003). Schule, Arbeit, Ausbildungszufriedenheit. In BFS/TREE (Hrsg.), Wege in die nachobligatorische Ausbildung. Die ersten zwei Jahre nach Austritt aus der obligatorischen Schule. Zwischenergebnisse des Jugendlängsschnitts TREE. Reihe Bildungsmonitoring Schweiz. Neuchâtel: Bundesamt für Statistik. Wild, K.-P. & Krapp, A. (1996). Die Qualität subjektiven Erlebens in schulischen und betrieblichen Lernumwelten. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 24(3), 195-216.

Author Information

Christof Nägele

Swiss Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training SFIVET

Zollikofen / Bern

Barbara E. Stalder

University of Basel

Juergen Seifried

University of Konstanz

Konstanz

Andreas Rausch

Otto-Friedrich-Universität Bamberg

Lehrstuhl für Wirtschaftspädagogik (Business Education)

Bamberg

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER.

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.