Over the past 20 years, there has been a significant increase in the numbers of work-based-learning programmes in Higher Education in Germany. These degree programmes placed at the intersection of vocational and higher education systematically combine academic studies in higher education institutions with practical work experience in companies. The growing importance of these programmes is reflected in both, the increasing number of such study programmes offered and in the rising number of students in work-based-learning programmes (Hofmann et al., 2023, p. 10). Furthermore, the expansion of these programmes is supported by education policies that aim to strengthen the interlinkage between vocational and higher education more intensely (Kuhlee & Irmscher, 2018, p. 9). Despite the increasing relevance of work-based-learning programmes little is known about the specific student clientele, their specific motives for choosing such a programme and their interest in terms of the academic and the practical field. In addition to the role of content interest or the high practical orientation of these students, existing evaluations indicate that important motives for choosing a work-based-learning programme are the combination of theory and practice or associated career opportunities (e.g., Nickel et al., 2022; Hesser & Langfeldt, 2017).

Existing research in higher education suggests that in addition to the motives for choosing a course of study other motivational variables that develop during the course of study are also important factors in terms of study success (Kegel et al., 2020; Blüthmann, 2012, pp. 291). However, the available studies tend to focus on single motivational variables in terms of their relevance to study success. This raises the question of whether a more differentiated and multidimensional consideration of motivational factors, in their interplay, can contribute to a better understanding of their influence on study success (Kegel et al., 2020).

Based on these considerations, this paper analyses in more detail the interplay between intrinsic and extrinsic motives for choosing a work-based-learning programme, academic interest and interest in practical work among students. The following questions arise: (1) To what extent can student profiles be distinguished in terms of their motivation for choosing a course of study and their interests? (2) How can these student profiles be described in terms of key characteristics such as educational background and migration background? (3) To what extent do these student profiles differ in terms of perceived study success?

Cross-sectional data from a questionnaire survey of 1,557 students in work-based-learning programmes in Germany are used to answer these questions. The data were collected as part of the research project INT-Hybrid funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). The Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) is used to examine whether homogeneous subgroups of students can be identified on the basis of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation for choosing a course of study, academic interest and interest in practical work (Rosenberg et al., 2018; Göller & Besser, 2022). In addition, a single-factor analysis of variance (ANOVA) is used to examine the extent to which the identified student profiles differ in their perceived study satisfaction, their perceived study performance, their identification with the higher education institution and the company as well as their intention to drop out as indicators for study success. The person-centred approach is used to analyse whether motivational variables can be used to identify different groups of students and the extent to which these profiles differ in terms of their perceived study success.

Overall, four distinct profiles can be identified, which do not differ in terms of their educational background or migration background. The results indicate that a high proportion of students (~ 64 %) can be assigned to a profile with a high level of motivation. In contrast, only a small group of students (~ 5 %) seems to stand out due to a low level of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation for choosing a course of study as well as a low level of academic interest and a low level of interest in the practical field. Regarding the analysed study success indicators, students in profiles with a high level of motivation report higher levels of study satisfaction and a lower intention to drop out compared to those with a low level of motivation. Given the small number of students who can be assigned to a profile with low motivational characteristics, the question arises as to the cause of this finding and is discussed in the paper. The reason might lie in the companies’ selection procedures for the allocation of places on work-based-learning programmes or in a very conscious choice of these students, indicating a high degree of compatibility between the students' expectations and the characteristics of work-based-learning programmes. Based on the identified student profiles, the paper discusses furthermore how group-specific approaches can be designed to foster the interest of less motivated students and positively influence their study success.

Blüthmann, I. (2012). Individuelle und studienbezogene Einflussfaktoren auf die Zufriedenheit von Bachelorstudierenden. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaften, 15, 273–303. Göller, R., & Besser, M. (2023). Studienwahlmotive von Bewerberinnen und Bewerbern auf ein Lehramtsstudium und auf andere Studiengänge. Studiengangübergreifende Vergleiche und Profilanalysen. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 37(4), 305–321. Hesser, W., & Langfeldt, B. (2017). Das duale Studium aus Sicht der Studierenden. Hamburg: Helmut-Schmidt-Universität/Universität der Bundeswehr Hamburg. Abgerufen von: https://openhsu.ub.hsu-hh.de/bitstream/10.24405/4327/1/openHSU_4327.pdf Hofmann, S., König, M., & Brenke, P. (2023). AusbildungPlus in Zahlen - Duales Studium in Zahlen 2022. Trends und Analysen. BIBB. Kegel, L. S., Schnettler, T., Scheunemann, A., Bäulke, L., Thies, D. O., Dresel, M., Fries, S., Leutner, D. Wirth, J., & Grunschel, C. (2020). Unterschiedlich motiviert für das Studium: Motivationale Profile von Studierenden und ihre Zusammenhänge mit demografischen Merkmalen, Lernverhalten und Befinden. Zeitschrift für empirische Hochschulforschung, 4(1), 81–105. Kuhlee, D., & Irmscher, M. (2018). Duales Studium vs. duale Ausbildung: Zur Diskussion um die Relevanz dualer Studienangebote unter Berücksichtigung der Unternehmensperspektive. bwp@, 34, 1–24. Nickel, S., Pfeiffer, I., Fischer, A., Hüsch, M., Kiepenheuer-Drechsler, B., Lauterbach, N., Reum, N., Thiele, A.-L., & Ulrich, S. (2022). Duales Studium: Umsetzungsmodelle und Entwicklungsbedarfe. wbv. Rosenberg, J. M., Beymer, P. N., Anderson, D. J., van Lissa, C. J., & Schmidt, J. A. (2018). tidyLPA: An R Package to Easily Carry Out Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) Using Open-Source or Commercial Software. Journal of Open Source Software, 3(30), 978. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.00978