A great deal of variation exists in how VET is organised across countries, making VET more diverse than other sectors of the education system (Kis, 2020). However, despite wide variations, VET in most countries includes a significant proportion of general subjects. However, within the VET discourse and the research field of vocational education, vocational subjects and workplace issues tend to receive more attention than general subjects (Schaap et al., 2012).  

This paper highlights the content and purpose of general subjects in VET. In Norway, 70–80% of the content in general subjects is common across educational programmes at upper secondary schools. There is a shared curriculum document for these general subjects. However, in VET, requirements were introduced in 2020, demanding that 20–30% of the content in these general subjects should be vocational-oriented. In Norway, teachers have the flexibility, ‘pedagogical freedom’ and ‘space’ to decide how, what, and when to integrate vocational orientation in their teaching. However, little research has been done on vocational orientation in general subjects in VET in Norway (Stene et al., 2014, p. 69). Dalby and Noyes (2022) have explored waves within the mathematics curriculum within VET over the last 30 years in England. Possibly, the vocational orientation of general subjects can be seen as yet another curriculum ‘wave’ within VET. However, using the Norwegian subject (national language subject) as a case, the following research questions are posited:

1)     What are teachers’ perspectives on vocational orientation in VET programmes in the Norwegian school subject?

2)     How do teachers re-contextualise vocational orientation in their teaching and practice?

This study takes a broad view of the term vocational orientation as a guiding principle, which refers to all approaches and convergences between general and vocational subjects. According to Lauglo (2005), vocational orientation is an academic concept, and the fact that the concept is possibly ‘theoretical’ makes it interesting to explore. The term vocational orientation is also often associated with the concept of relevance. However, relevance can be seen as a broader concept independent of vocational orientation. Stuckey et al. (2013), within the context of science education, refer to three dimensions of relevance: individual, vocational and societal. From this perspective, relevant content means reaching the students in ways that make general subjects useful and interesting in every part of their lives, not just at school.   

In the global context, VET mainly serves two purposes: qualifying students for a work profession and contributing to social inclusiveness and equality (Hegna et al., 2012). However, according to Carstensen and Ibsen (2021), VET research has tended to view equality as a ‘potential side-effect rather than a driver for reform trajectories in VET’ (p. 1043). Furthermore, in the Norwegian context, VET also aims to provide students with general knowledge so that the student, at a later stage, can progress to higher education.

Overall, general subjects in VET are in a cross-press between different purposes. Moreover, vocational orientation has the potential to bridge the gap between academic subjects and the world of work. On the other hand, the vocational orientation of general subjects may also limit students’ access to theoretical knowledge. Therefore, to better understand the dimensions of vocational orientation, this study combines approaches from curriculum theory concerned with knowledge in school subjects (Hordern, 2014, 2022; Muller & Young, 2019; Wheelahan, 2007, 2015) with empirical research in the Norwegian context that identifies different ways of understanding vocational orientation. These include 1) lowering the level, 2) using vocational examples, 3) using the general subject as a tool and 4) pursuing joint projects (Stene et al., 2014). 

This qualitative study uses three data sets: 1) policy documents, including the formal national curriculum document of the Norwegian subject from 2020; 2) individual interviews with teachers in the Norwegian subject in different VET programmes; and 3) learning resources and material the teachers bring to the interview as examples of how they approach vocational orientation in their classrooms. Analysis of the policy documents and the learning resources work as a backdrop, a supplementary data source, primarily to provide contextualisation for the interviews. Analyses of the teachers’ interviews conducted in October and November 2022 are at the forefront of this study. The 10 participating teachers were from four different municipalities and were randomly selected according to their availability and willingness to participate. Their teaching experience ranged from 6 to 25 years. The interview guide included questions about how the teachers understood the concept of vocational orientation, collaboration across general and vocational subjects and operationalisation of vocational orientation in their teaching. The analysis of the interviews was inspired by thematic analysis (Braun & Clark, 2012) and the initial systematising of the transcribed interviews resulted in four preliminary themes: 1) understanding of vocational orientation (definitions); 2) rationale, argumentation, and justification; 3) emphasis (to what degree do they use the strategy of vocational orientation); and 4) reported practices (how they do it).

A preliminary analysis of the Norwegian subject curriculum document reveals that vocational orientation is mainly connected to learning vocational terminology, writing in vocationally relevant genres, and reading technical material relevant to one’s vocational field. According to the narrative in the subject curriculum document of Norwegian, vocational orientation is a narrow tool or strategy. In contrast, in the preliminary analysis of the teachers’ interviews, most teachers do not have a narrow understanding of vocational orientation because the analysis reveals that teachers have >50% of vocational orientation in their teaching. They use the idea of vocational orientation to make the Norwegian subject relevant, connect it to vocational subjects and prepare students for working life that requires reading, writing, digital, and oral communication skills. An interesting finding so far is that oral skills, often in combination with digital skills, expressing oneself appropriately in planned communication situations, and using professional language, including the ability to plan and carry out various oral presentations, is something the teachers emphasise. The findings reveal that the teachers use their flexibility, ‘pedagogical freedom’ and ‘space’ when navigating vocational orientation. The interviews and the example materials analysed so far tell a story of oral and digital skills being at the forefront, while writing and reading skills are more backgrounded. The operationalised Norwegian subject in VET seems quite different from what is expressed in the formal subject curriculum of the Norwegian subject. Given these tentative findings, one may suppose that the ‘academic values’ in the formal curriculum do not take priority when teaching the Norwegian subject in VET programmes. Considering the pedagogic implications arising from this research, further discussions might include whether a common curriculum document in general subjects, as is the model in Norway currently, is the best solution for VET and what types of curriculum we need in VET.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. In H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K. J. Sher (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology: Vol. 2. Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (pp. 57–71). American Psychological Association. Carstensen, M. B., & Ibsen, C. L. (2021). Three dimensions of institutional contention: Efficiency, equality and governance in Danish vocational education and training reform. Socio-Economic Review, 19(3), 1037–1063. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwz012 Dalby, D., & Noyes, A. (2022). Mathematics curriculum waves within vocational education. Oxford Review of Education, 48(2), 166–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2021.1940913 Hegna, K., Dæhlen, M., Smette, I., & Wollscheid, S. (2012). «For mye teori» i fag- og yrkesopplæringen – et spørsmål om målsettinger i konflikt? – Europeiske utdanningsregimer og den norske modellen [ «Too much theory» in vocational education and training – a question of conflicting objectives?]. Tidsskrift for samfunnsforskning, 53(2), 217–232. https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1504-291X-2012-02-04 Hordern, J. (2014). How is vocational knowledge re-contextualised? Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 66(1), 22–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2013.867524 Hordern, J. (2022). Powerful knowledge and knowledgeable practice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 54(2), 196–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2021.1933193 Lauglo, J. (2005). Vocationalised secondary education revisited. In R. Maclean, D. Wilson, & J. Lauglo (Eds.), Vocationalisation of secondary education revisited (Vol. 1, pp. 3–49). Springer Netherlands. Muller, J., & Young, M. (2019). Knowledge, power and powerful knowledge re-visited. The Curriculum Journal, 30(2), 196–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2019.1570292 Kis, V. (2020). Improving evidence on VET: Comparative data and indicators (OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 250). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/d43dbf09-en Schaap, H., Baartman, L., & de Bruijn, E. (2012). Students’ learning processes during school-based learning and workplace learning in vocational education: A review. Vocations and Learning, 5(2), 99–117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-011-9069-2 Stene, M., Haugset, S. A., & Iversen, V. M. J. (2014). Yrkesretting og relevans i fellesfagene. En kunnskapsoversikt [Vocational orientation and relevance. A knowledge overview]. Trøndelag forskning og utvikling. Stuckey, M., Hofstein, A., Mamlok-Naaman, R., & Eilks, I. (2013). The meaning of ‘relevance’ in science education and its implications for the science curriculum. Studies in Science Education, 49(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2013.802463 Wheelahan, L. (2007). How competency‐based training locks the working class out of powerful knowledge: A modified Bernsteinian analysis. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 28(5), 637–651. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425690701505540 Wheelahan, L. (2015). Not just skills: What a focus on knowledge means for vocational education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 47(6), 750–762. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2015.1089942