Students enrolled in the vocational track of lower secondary education often do not reach the minimum level of basic literacy (Carpentier et al., 2020). However, basic education that focuses on developing key competences is necessary to successfully participate and contribute to our complex society and social life. With the attempt to realize more inclusive education, the student population in prevocational education has become more diverse and challenging. Students with different educational needs and abilities are now entering prevocational education. Moreover, students with ethnically diverse backgrounds and low socioeconomic disadvantages are more likely to be low performers, implying that personal or social circumstances are obstacles to achieving their educational potential (OECD, 2012). In summary, the complexity and diversity of the student population in prevocational education create an exceptionally challenging context for teachers to teach.

In order to provide quality education, a powerful and supportive learning environment in prevocational secondary education is crucial. The teacher, within the school team, plays a key role in helping students to develop successes in education. Therefore, knowledge on the characteristics of effective learning environments and how to successfully implement them in prevocational education is indispensable.

A review of literature on effective (pedagogical-didactic) teaching principles to create powerful learning environments in prevocational education is currently missing. The aim of this study is to perform a literature review to close the current knowledge gap and to contribute to quality education for all children in the prevocational track of secondary education. The research question in this study is:

What teaching principles are key to designing effective learning environments for low achieving students in the prevocational track of secondary education (grades 7-8), according to international empirical research?

The chosen methodology to conduct a systematic literature review is ‘Best Fit Framework synthesis’ (BFFS) (Carroll et al., 2013). BFFS provides a way to test, amplify and build on (an) existing and published model(s) for a slightly different population and/or context (Carroll et al., 2013). According to BFFS, the existing models are thematically analyzed and recreated into an ‘a priori framework’. This framework will be refined, adjusted and enriched where necessary according to primary studies to ultimately result in a new, more specific, framework (Carroll et al., 2013). The systematic search consists of three stages. First, a systematic search was conducted to identify the existing models, theories or frameworks related to learning environments in lower secondary education. This search resulted in three studies that were thematically coded and summarized into an a priori framework. Secondly, primary studies are systematically searched in order to collect all effectiveness studies with an experimental design (true, quasi-, or single-case studies), specifically targeting interventions to optimize the (non)cognitive learning outcomes of low achieving students in lower secondary education. At the time of submission, reviewers are working on the second systematic search of the BFFS. Third, the study will code the final list of primary studies into themes and synthesize the themes against the concepts of the a priori framework. Finally, a new conceptual framework will be created, ultimately with evidence from the included studies to the a priori themes, plus any new themes generated by the thematic analysis falling outside of the a priori framework (Carroll et al., 2013). For both searches, the databases Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, ERIC(OvidSP) and EBSCOhost were used. To ensure the quality and reliability of these systematic searches, two researchers were involved to conduct both literature studies in cooperation (Snyder, 2019). For the analysis of the articles the PRISMA guidelines (Moher et al., 2009) were applied. After every screening phase, disagreements between the reviewers were discussed and an informed decision by both reviewers was made. Other relevant articles were found through snowballing, citation searching, and recommendations by experts. Both reviewers selected studies that met the inclusion criteria. The general inclusion criteria for both systematic searches were: (1) published in peer-reviewed journals, (2) written in English or Dutch, (3) student population of grades 4-8, (4) aiming to improve (non)cognitive learning. More specific inclusion criteria were formulated depending on which systematic search was conducted, following the conditions of a BFFS.

The aim of this study was to identify effective key teaching principles to design powerful learning environments for low achieving students in the prevocational track of secondary education (grades 7-8). Since this study is currently ongoing, we can only report salient features from the first systematic search at this time. As mentioned before, this search resulted in three articles. After a thematic analysis we identified nine crucial elements of a powerful learning environment in lower secondary education: (1) safe and positive learning environment, (2) classroom management, (3) quality of instruction, (4) strategies for the development of 21st century skills, (5) adaptive teaching and learning, (6) challenging learning pathways in authentic contexts, (7) pedagogical (content) knowledge, (8) teacher beliefs about subject, learning & teaching, and (9) professionalization and collegiality in teacher teams (Coe et al., 2014; Inda-Caro et al., 2019; Placklé et al., 2020). Since the growing diversity in schools and classrooms in prevocational education, and the constatation that these students are at risk of not reaching the minimum level of basic literacy, it is even more crucial to refine and enrich these themes with effective teaching principles that are key to designing powerful learning environments in prevocational education. As we are finalizing this research in April 2022, and if accepted, a presentation at the ECER conference of our findings in August will be a first.

Carroll, C., Booth, A., Leaviss, J., & Rick, J. (2013). “Best fit” framework synthesis: Refining the method. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 13(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-37 Coe, R., Aloisi, C., Higgins, S., & Major, L. E. (2014). What makes great teaching? Review of the underpinning research. [Monograph]. Project Report. Sutton Trust, London.; Sutton Trust. http://www.suttontrust.com/researcharchive/great-teaching/ Inda-Caro, M., Maulana, R., Fernández-García, C.-M., Peña-Calvo, J.-V., Rodríguez-Menéndez, M. C., & Helms-Lorenz, M. (2019). Validating a model of effective teaching behaviour and student engagement: Perspectives from Spanish students. Learning Environments Research, 22(2), 229–251. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-018-9275-z De Corte, E. 1990. “Towards Powerful Learning Environments for the Acquisition of Problem Solving Skills.” European Journal of Psychology of Education 5 (1): 5–19. doi:10.1007/BF03172765. Placklé, I., Könings, K. D., Struyven, K., Libotton, A., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Engels, N. (2020). Powerful learning environments in secondary vocational education: Towards a shared understanding. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43(2), 224–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2019.1681965 van Merriënboer, J. J. G., and F. Paas. 2003. “Powerful Learning and the Many Faces of Instructional Design: Toward a Framework for the Design of Powerful Learning Environments.” In Unravelling Basic Components and Dimensions of Powerful Learning Environments, edited by E. de Corte, L. Verschaffel, N. Entwistle, and J. J. G. van Merriënboer, 3–20. Oxford: Elsevier Science. Snyder, H., (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines, Journal of Business Research, 104, 333-339.