In Norwegian vocational education and training (VET) with a two plus two sequential model for VET, the responsibility for competence development among VET teachers and trainers have been spread over several different stakeholders and agencies, with vast regional differences (Jørgensen et al, 2018). The responsibilities for competence development among vocational teachers and trainers in VET is divided between higher educational institutions (HEIs), the parties in tripartite cooperation, and is allocated to local districts/counties, as well as through enterprise training offices/age and trade specific systems (Nore & Lahn, 2014). This project aims to evaluate the implementation of an OECD-model in Norwegian VET for decentralized competence development (EVACOMP-VET), Network and cooperative models for decentralized OECD-model for competence development, pose several pertinent questions that is examined through this project (OECD, 2019). The scope of this evaluation study is to map and evaluate how the OECD decentralized model for competence development functions in perspectives of VET professional and vocational competence, as well as in different learning contexts and boundary crossing (Akkerman, 2011; Caves, Baumann, & Renold, 2019). This paper aims to chart the status quo for the competence development strategies for vocational teachers, trainers in enterprises, trade certificate examiners and intermediary agency training offices trainers, surveyed in five strategically selected Norwegian districts/counties. This sequence of data collection is the point of departure in a comparative perspective for the later stages in the EVACOMP-VET-study evaluating the implementation of the decentralized model.The competence requirements among the different stakeholders in Norwegian VET are extensively varied, and there is tension between them in how and what they see fit as systems and contents for competence development in VET in regards to what is vocational and professional competence and vocational didactics (Billett, 2011; Deissinger & Gonon, 2016; Mulder, 2014; Nägele & Stalder, 2018). The data from the mapping of the Norwegian decentralized model will be analyzed in an international comparative perspective, with various models of TVET, apprenticeship, trade certificates and vocational teacher’s and trainer’s qualifications, skilling and upskilling (Brockmann, Clarke, & Winch, 2008; European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training & European Commission, 2014; Mulder, 2017).

The design of the study methodology is a mixed methods approach, comprised of surveys to five selected county/district chancellors regarding the implementation of the decentralized competence development model. There will be document studies of relevant policy documents and meeting minutes. The data will also on the basis on the data from the surveys include qualitative interviews recorded digitally (Zoom) with central stakeholders, also discussing the impact of the data using digital tools for qualitative interviews (Archibald et al, 2019).

Examining the stakeholder’s responsibilities and roles in relation to each other, will be important in order to evaluate if and how they change over time in the OECD model of decentralized competence development in Norwegian VET (OECD, 2019). Important questions to ask and to answer in charting the point of departure of the model involve: • How do the stakeholders themselves perceive their responsibilities and roles? In relation to each other and at the start of the decentralized competence development model. In Norwegian VET this might be particularly challenging, given the complexity of the VET model and the many stakeholders and low degree of formalization. The findings are largely influenced by the current situation of the pandemic causing disruption in VET by economical consequences in the work-based learning and the professional practices of VET teachers. • The model of Markowitsch & Grollmann with the three different domains of VET: Socioeconomic/Labor market, Educational System and Pedagogical/Epistemological perspective will provide an analytical framework for understanding the roles of the stakeholders in the decentralized competence model (Markowitsch & Grollmann, 2017). • The findings address the complexity in VET in between the partners in the labor market, the logic of the competence development structures of the labor market. • The discussion elaborate on the relations between the parties in the tripartite model on the one side, educational policy makers and the educational system’s understanding of vocational competence and training. • The study will end in a final discussion on whether the data concerning the implementation of the decentralized model contributes towards empowering local capacity building for competence development of vocational teachers and training instructors through tripartite partnership, or a policy driven bureaucratization model?

Akkerman, S. F. (2011). Learning at boundaries. International Journal of Educational Research, 50(1), 21-25. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2011.04.005 Archibald, M. M., Ambagtsheer, R. C., Casey, M. G., & Lawless, M. (2019). Using Zoom Videoconferencing for Qualitative Data Collection: Perceptions and Experiences of Researchers and Participants. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18, 1609406919874596. doi:10.1177/1609406919874596 Billett, S. (2011). Vocational Education: Purposes, Traditions and Prospects. Dordrecht: Springer. Brockmann, M., Clarke, L., & Winch, C. (2008). Knowledge, skills, competence: European divergences in vocational education and training (VET)—the English, German and Dutch cases. Oxford Review of Education, 34(5), 547-567. doi:10.1080/03054980701782098 Caves, K. M., Baumann, S., & Renold, U. (2019). Getting there from here: a literature review on vocational education and training reform implementation. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 1-32. doi:10.1080/13636820.2019.1698643 Deissinger, T., & Gonon, P. (2016). Stakeholders in the German and Swiss vocational educational and training system: Their role in innovating apprenticeships against the background of academisation. Education + Training, 58(6), 568-577. doi:10.1108/ET-02-2016-0034 European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training, & European Commission. (2014). Guiding principles on professional development of trainers in vocational education and training. In (pp. 52 p.). Thessaloniki: Cedefop. Jørgensen, C. H., Olsen, O. J., & Thunqvist, D. P. (2018). Vocational education in the Nordic countries : learning from diversity. Markowitsch, J., & Grollmann, P. (2017). The changing nature and role of vocational education and training. Volume 2: Results of a survey among European VET experts. Cedefop Mulder, M. (2014). Conceptions of Professional Competence. In S. Billett, C. Harteis, & H. Gruber (Eds.), International Handbook of Research in Professional and Practice-based Learning (pp. 107-137). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. Mulder, M. (2017). Competence-based Vocational and Professional Education - Briding the Gap Between Work and Education (Vol. 23). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. Nore, H., & Lahn, L. C. (2014). Bridging the Gap between Work and Education in Vocational Education and Training. A study of Norwegian Apprenticeship Training Offices and E-Portfolio Systems. International Journal of Research on Vocational Education and Training, 1(1), 21-34. doi:10.13152/IJRVET.1.1.2 Nägele, C., & Stalder, B. E. (2018). Competence and the Need for Transferable Skills. In M. Mulder (Ed.), Competence-based Vocational and Professional Education - Briding the Gap Between Work and Education (Vol. 23, pp. 739-753). Switzerland: Springer. OECD. (2019). Improving School Quality in Norway: the New Competence Development Model, implementing Education Policies. Retrieved from Paris: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/publication/179d4ded-en