This study will investigate the changing professional role and practice of Further Education and Training (FET) teachers in meeting the needs of employers and industry. Initial exploratory findings will be used to develop a framework for establishing collaborative communities of practice and strategic partnerships between Further Education and Training (FET) educators, industry professionals and relevant other stakeholders.

The FET sector in Ireland has recently undergone fundamental reform (O'Leary & Rami, 2017) with the formation of SOLAS as the state organisation responsible for funding, planning and coordinating FET in Ireland. Alongside SOLAS are the 16 Education and Training Boards (ETBs) tasked with managing and delivering regional education provisions.

The National Further Education and Training Strategy (SOLAS, 2020) seeks improved alignment with industrial strategy and more employer partnerships. These strategic priorities include "closing the gap between vocation educational training and real cutting-edge industry innovation and technology development" (SOLAS, 2020, p 31).

While SOLAS firmly establishes Education and Training Boards (ETBs) as a critical resource for enterprise in up-skilling of staff and developing a future pipeline of talent, there are outstanding organisational design issues to be addressed for "a clear sense of how ETB staffing and structures need to evolve to deliver on the Future FET goals… and realise the full potential of the system." (SOLAS, 2020, p 56)

The reform of the FET sector in Ireland and abroad resulted in ideological tensions. O'Brien (2018) argued that the commoditisation and marketisation of education have resulted in FET provisions being subservient to the interests of the economy rather than being driven by emancipatory goals. Vocational Education and Training (VET) reforms in Australia (Locke and Maton, 2019) and the United Kingdom (Hodge, 2016) that drew ideas and values from political and economic fields resulted in teaching and education being reduced to focusing on certification and metrics. O'Brien (2018) reported similar findings in the Irish context, with provisions shifting from a flexible learner-centred approach to a simplified funder-centred system-driven model.

The acceleration to align education with employability is noted by O'Neill and Fitzsimons (2020), with a top-down re-organisation that has contributed to a "contested profession" of FET teacher.

This study proposes a bottom-up analysis through the theoretical lens of Expansive Learning and Activity Theory (Engestrom and Sannino, 2010) to map learning opportunities across multiple professional boundaries. Through a multi-voiced process, Expansive Learning takes a "societally essential dilemma which cannot be resolved through individual actions alone – but in which joint cooperative actions can push a historically new form of activity into emergence." (Engestrom, 2015, p 165)

By mapping the multiple professional perspectives of stakeholders as interdependent activity systems, this study will account for the social complexities integral to the FET ecosystem. The Expansive Learning Cycle (ELC) process, will be used to co-create practices and cultures for sustainable strategic partnerships. At the intersection of FET, industry and relevant stakeholders, learning is not primarily the process of transmitting and preserving cultures or processes, but rather the process of transformation and creating culture.

 Driving this proposed research study are the following questions:

1. How is the role of FET teachers changing in response to sectoral reform?
2. What is the role of FET teachers in improving alignment with industrial strategy and establishing more employer partnerships?
3. How can FET teachers be supported in establishing strategic partnerships and collaborative communities of practice with industry professionals and other relevant stakeholders?

A transformative mixed-methods cyclical design (Mertens, 2018), Figure 3, will be employed to examine the changing role of FET teachers within strategic partnerships. A critical theorist view, as described by Habermas (1976), will seek to understand and change the phenomenon under study through descriptive and evaluative concepts (Hammersley, 2013). Burke Johnson's (2017) philosophical framework of dialectical pluralism will capture data from multiple voices, perspectives and ideological positions, with insights mapped to Engestrom's (2015) Activity System model. Mertens (2022) advocates the integration of quantitative and qualitative data to reveal different versions of reality to critically examine. Arguing the value of dissonance and difference in society, Burke Johnson (2017) describes Dialectical Pluralism as "listening, understanding, learning and acting" to "capitalise on multiple and divergent insights/truths". As a multiphase study, descriptions of initial study phases are provided in more detail. Phase 1 will gather initial qualitative data through semi-structured interviews with purposive sampling of six representatives from stakeholder groups to explore relevant perspectives. A key function of this initial phase is to identify sub-groups most impacted by the strategic changes in FET, and to establish supportive relationships with stakeholders to aid reaching potential participants for subsequent study phases. Phase 2 of the study will adopt an exploratory sequential design (Creswell & Plano Clarke, 2018). Focus groups (2-4) of participants from identified sub-groups will explore the challenges of FET partnerships. Thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2022) of focus group data will identify emergent themes and map the interdependent activity systems. Informed by qualitative findings, a survey tool will be developed and disseminated to a larger probability sample to measure the prevalence and relationships of identified variables within target sub-groups. Phase 3 will see the development of an intervention informed by previous phase findings. The piloting of the intervention will be undertaken with the support of a partner institution recruited through established dissemination channels. Facilitated workshops, pre & post-questionnaires and observations will be used to evaluate the intervention and inform modifications. Building upon the study pilot, Phase 4 will see the full implementation of the intervention in at least one partner institution. Data will be gathered through observations, partner meetings, and pre & post-implementation evaluations. In determining the effectiveness of the intervention, Phase 5 may require follow-up data collection on unexpected study outcomes and data collected during implementation. Phase 6 will involve the final analysis of study findings, sustainability of intervention and recommendations for dissemination.

This study will explore FET's intertwined and interdependent ecosystem, with inherent contradictions and tensions. By better understanding the reformed FET sector, the professional role of teachers can be developed to meeting new challenges while retaining professional values and standards. This study aims to develop a framework for creating partnerships for collaborative communities of practice of FET and industry professionals. It is hoped that the developed framework, with supporting tools and platforms, will support the collaborative co-creation of value between FET and industry. Through the articulation and practical engagement with identified issues, teachers and other relevant stakeholders can be bound by an object of learning that is moving, motivating and future-generating towards sustainable strategic partnerships and collaborative practice.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE. Burke Johnson, R. (2017). Dialectical Pluralism: A Metaparadigm Whose Time Has Come. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 11(2), 156–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815607692 Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (Third edition, international student edition). Sage. Engeström, Y. (2015). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research (Second edition). Cambridge University Press. Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2010). Studies of expansive learning: Foundations, findings and future challenges. Educational Research Review, 5(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2009.12.002 Hammersley, M. (2013). What is Qualitative Research? Bloomsbury Academic. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781849666084 Hodge, S. (2016). Alienating curriculum work in Australian vocational education and training. Critical Studies in Education, 57(2), 143–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2015.1009842 Locke, P., & Maton, K. (2019). Serving two masters: How vocational educators experience marketisation reforms. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 71(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2018.1480521 Mertens, D. M. (2022). Mixed Methods Integration for Transformative Purposes. In J. H. Hitchcock & A. J. Onwuegbuzie, The Routledge Handbook for Advancing Integration in Mixed Methods Research (1st ed., pp. 71–85). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429432828-7 O'Brien, T. (2018). Adult literacy organisers in Ireland resisting neoliberalism. Education + Training, 60(6), 556–568. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-03-2018-0055 O'Leary, M., & Rami, J. (2017). The impact of austerity in Further Education. In B. Bartram (Ed.), International and Comparative Education (1st ed., pp. 74–86). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315563091-7 O'Neill, J., & Fitzsimons, C. (2020). Precarious professionality: Graduate outcomes and experiences from an Initial Teacher (Further) Education programme in Ireland. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 25(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13596748.2020.1720143 SOLAS. (2020). Future FET: Transforming Learning. https://www.solas.ie/f/70398/x/64d0718c9e/solas_fet_strategy_web.pdf