In Germany, teachers traditionally study two subjects, for regular schools for example physics and English. In vocational education and training (VET), for example metalworking and English. This is in line with teaching at regular schools: Students have lessons in ~10 subjects each week and each teacher is responsible for two subjects. In VET-schools, this classical structure of teaching was replaced successively since the late 1990s by the so-called “learning field” approach (Lernfeldansatz, cp. for example KMK 2007). In this teaching approach, apprentices only have lessons in their vocation, subdivided into 10-15 (depending on the vocation) consecutive learning fields distributed over three years. General subjects like “[m]athematical and scientific content, technical contents, safety information and economics, business administration and ecological aspects should be imparted in an integrative manner within the learning fields” and “40 hours of English language objectives and contents are integrated into the learning fields” (BIBB 2015). In the first ten years after this re-structuring, many generic papers on learning fields have been published (cp. for example Fischer 2004, Straka 2005, Deitmer 2007).In the last years, nonetheless, the scientific and pedagogical discussions became rather quiet. Now, more than 25 years after this paradigmatic shift, it is time to explore its introduction, success, possible weaknesses and development potentials – and to work on the latter. Our research questions, exemplarily for the general subjects of physics and English, are:

* How advanced is the implementation of the learning fields on meso-level in the technical VET-schools in the German federal state of Bremen?

* Are there any concrete concepts or collections of examples of apparent good practice that could support VET-teachers in teaching accordingly?

* How does the implementation on micro (teaching)-level take place?

* From the perspective of the teachers, where are the deficits and how could they be overcome?

Although the empirical part of the study focusses on one country, only, we expect that the paper could help improving VET-teaching and VET teacher education in other countries, as well – and vice-versa, so that we could learn from the experiences made in other countries represented by delegates in the audience.

To work on the first question, we performed desk research, referring to all publications on legislative, administrative, pedagogical and research level about learning fields in the German federal state of Bremen (and beyond). Additionally, also focusing on the second question, we interviewed the delegates for physics and respectively English of four respective all five technical VET-schools in Bremen and the representatives of the regulating authority. The research method applied to answer the third question was participating observation in VET teaching. The findings from the first three methods set the basis for the work on the fourth question: developing, testing and improving examples of apparent good practice via design based research (DBR).

Formally, the learning field approach is implemented in the technical VET-schools in Bremen. This means that no separate lessons for general subjects exist anymore – with the partial exemption of English: few schools still offer separate lessons as they experienced that their technical teachers cannot impart English. However, neither concrete concepts for implementation nor collections of apparent good practice exist. Accordingly, the implementation on micro-level depends on the interests and strengths of each single teacher. If a teacher is good in physics, for example, or even had physics as second subject during higher education career, physical concepts are explained. Otherwise, all physics-teaching potentials when tackling “energy”, “force”, “impetus”, “tension”, “current” etc. from a technical perspective are wasted during the lessons. The same applies for English: most teachers do not feel confident working in a foreign language and thus ignore their task to impart it. It became very clear that the teachers have the feeling that they have been left alone with the task of implementing the learning fields. They seek support on a low-threshold level, which means no additional policy papers any more, but examples of apparent good practice. Thus, we started to develop, test and improve a couple of learning sequences, integrated in learning situations for technical subjects, for English and physics that we would like to present on the ECER 2023 – to collect feedback from a broader audience.

BIBB (2015): Ordinance on vocational education and training in the industrial mechanic. https://www.govet.international/dokumente/pdf/Industriemechaniker_Zerspanungsmechaniker_Uebersetzung_AO_RLP(1).pdf (consulted 26.01.23). Deitmer, L. (2007): Die Einführung des Lernfeldkonzeptes in der beruflichen Erstausbildung – Definition/Ziel des Konzeptes, Erwartungen, Auswirkungen auf Curricula, Schulorganisation, Unterrichtsgestaltung und Lernortkooperation, Handlungsschritte zur Einführung, Ausblick. In: Kreklau, Sieger (Hrsg.): Handbuch der Aus- und Weiterbildung, 181 Erg.-lfg., Unterschleißheim/München: Wolters Kluwer Deutschland. Fischer (2004): Grundprobleme didaktischen Handelns und die arbeitsorientierte Wende in der Berufsbildung. Berufs- und Wirtschaftspädagogik online. http://www.bwpat.de/ausgabe4/fischer.shtml (consulted 26.01.2023). KMK (2007): Handreichung für die Erarbeitung von Rahmenlehrplänen der Kultusministerkonferenz für den berufsbezogenen Unterricht in der Berufsschule. https://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/Dateien/veroeffentlichungen_beschluesse/2007/2007_09_01-Handreich-Rlpl-Berufsschule.pdf (consulted 26.01.2023). Straka (2005): Prüfungen und Standards in der beruflichen Bildung. Die KMK-Handreichungen zur Erarbeitung von Rahmenlehrplänen - eine kritische Reflexion zum zehnten Jahrestag. Berufs- und Wirtschaftspädagogik online. https://www.bwpat.de/ausgabe8/straka_bwpat8.shtml (consulted 26.01.2023).