The overall aim of the study is to examine the influence of EU governance instruments on national VET structures. The focus of the study is on the professional group of midwives. It is based on the change of qualification from vocational training to a Bachelor's degree in Germany. This full academisation came into force in 2023. This case is representative of developments in the academicisation of health professions in Germany. An EU comparison shows that the health and care professions are mainly characterised by degree programmes. In Germany, vocational training programmes are still the most common. 

In Germany, the academicisation of midwifery training was primarily justified by European mobility. However, reasons such as greater attractiveness, better pay and professionalisation are also discussed in the literature. Nevertheless, there are representatives who continue to criticise this specific academisation. These include, above all, representatives of the medical associations, who fear, among other things, that their areas of responsibility will shrink.

This raises the question of why Germany has such a long tradition of vocational training in the health professions, why academisation has now been pushed through and to what extent the influence of the EU plays a role. The last point relates specifically to the question of whether and to what extent mobility and recognition instruments increase the academisation of VET systems. In particular, reference is made to Directive 2005/36/EC. 

A comparative analysis will be made of the extent to which the countries of Germany, Austria and Switzerland have adapted their legal requirements for midwifery training to the demands of the EU Directive in the periods 2002 and 2022. Particular attention will be paid to the historical development of women's professions and the extent to which systematic discrimination has influenced the professionalisation of midwifery in Germany, Austria and Switzerland.

Neo-institutionalism serves as the theoretical framework. Based on the underlying European Union and its inherent interconnectedness, the EU Directive 2005/36/EC as an institution implies the uniform values and beliefs of the EU. The values and expectations of the EU, and consequently the specifications of the legal norms derived from them, constitute the legitimation of national educational structures at the EU level. When countries implement the requirements of Directive 2005/36/EC, they legitimise themselves and gain access to resources (e.g. funds or foreign workers) or support (e.g. bilateral cooperation). It is expected that this adaptation to European movements will have a strong influence that may displace traditional national practices.

The overarching methodology is the international comparison based on Bereday. The comparison is primarily based on the national laws of Germany, Austria and Switzerland with regard to the regulation of midwives' qualifications. In order to be able to reconstruct whether and, if so, which changes the Directive 2005/36/EC entails on the national level and how the process of change proceeds the above-mentioned Directive in its current version of 10.12.2021 is set as an independent variable which is in line with the classical approaches of Europeanisation research. The counterpart and, thus, the dependent variable, is the national formal structure of midwifery training in the sense of the underlying research interest. In the context of this survey the operationalised element of formal structures are the country-specific regulations that determine the formal structure of midwifery training. Accordingly, primary sources that regulate midwifery training in a legally binding manner such as laws, guidelines, ordinances or similar national legal acts are examined. The specific study data of formal regulations are inductively generated from the requirements for automatic recognition of professional qualifications of the EU Directive 2005/36/EC (type, duration of training, theory-practice ratio, access requirements). In order to better illustrate the process-related changes in national regulations due to the influence of EU Directive 2005/36/EC the formal structures before and after the influence of the Directive are surveyed by means of a vertical comparison. For this purpose, it will be analysed to what extent the national regulations differ from the EU Directive 2005/36/EC at the time before the Directive (t1 = 2002) and at the time after the Directive (t2 = 2022). The comparison of the two points in time allows statements to be made about the extent of the procedural change in the formal structure. The results are then placed in relation to historical developments so that breaks or continuities can be explained more specifically.

With regard to midwifery training, the results suggest convergence between the countries of Germany, Austria and Switzerland on the one hand, and convergence between the region of Germany, Austria and Switzerland and the EU Directive 2005/36/EC on the other. At the same time, similarities in the historical development of the professionalisation of midwifery in the countries studied were identified. In particular, medicalisation and discrimination against women's professions by male professions such as physicians have influenced the development of the profession. In recent years in particular, there have been major successes in the emancipation of midwives. In addition to the purely formal requirements, Directive 2005/36/EC also conveys institutional myths, because although the Directive does not explicitly call for the academisation of midwifery training, this will be the case in Germany, Austria and Switzerland by 2022.

Eising, R. (2006). Europäisierung und Integration. Konzepte in der EU-Forschung. In M. Jachtenfuchs & B. Kohler-Koch (eds.), Europäische Integration (pp. 387–416). Wiesbaden: Springer. Igl, G. (2020). Das Gesetz zur Reform der Hebammenausbildung: Ein weiterer Schritt in Richtung auf die Modernisierung der Heilberufeausbildung. Medizinrecht, 38(5), 342–348. Koch, S. (2009). Die Bausteine neo-institutionalistischer Organisationstheorie – Begriffe und Konzepte im Lauf der Zeit. In S. Koch & M. Schemmann (eds.), Neo-Institutionalismus in der Erziehungswissenschaft. Grundlegende Texte und empirische Studien (pp. 110–132). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Luyben, A. G., Wijnen, H. A. A., Oblasser, C., Perrenoud, P., & Gross, M. M. (2013). The current state of midwifery and development of midwifery research in four European countries. Midwifery, 29(5), 417–424. Mériaux-Kratochvila, S. (2021). The academization of the health professions in Austria: facts and figures. International Journal of Health Professions, 8(1), 141–145. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363. Münk, D. (2010). Fest gemauert in der Erden? Der europäische Integrationsprozess und die berufliche Bildung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. In G. Bosch, S. Krone, & D. Langer (eds.), Das Berufsbildungssystem in Deutschland. Aktuelle Entwicklungen und Standpunkte (pp. 189–220). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Radaelli, C. M. (2004). Europeanisation: Solution or problem? European Integration online Papers, 8(16), 1–16. Vermeulen, J., Luyben, A. G., O’Connell, R., Gillen, P., Escuriet, R., & Fleming, V. (2019). Failure or progress?: The current state of the professionalisation of midwifery in Europe. European Journal of Midwifery, 22(3), 1–9. Walkenhorst, U. (2022). Akademisierung und Professionalisierung in den Gesundheitsfachberufen. In G. Rüve & P. Altvater (eds.), Strategische Entwicklungen von Hochschulen für Angewandte Wissenschaften (pp. 51–59). HIS – Institut für Hochschulentwicklung e.V.