Making use of research-related tools in developing partnership cooperation

and workplace learning - Capitalisation of the toolboxes of recent European

projects

Ludger Deitmer, University of Bremen, Institute Technology and Education (ITB)

Draft paper for conference proceedings in the session 11c; Developing Educational
Services for Workplace Learning Partnerships

Summary
There are many debates about the future of VET in Europe; like the basic structures of an
appropriate VET systems (school, dual or alternance based), or the curriculum design to
support work based learning, or the institutional conditions needed for schools and training
centres. The topic of inter activeness or networking between vocational school and enterprises
who take young school leavers, trainees, apprentices is now discussed for quite long time and
did not lead to clear answers. Because of the shift from traditional curricula to work based
learning the cooperation issue is receiving higher interest.
This article likes to discuss the collaboration under local VET schools and training companies.
Empirical results from surveys on the cooperation of the learning venues show us that in the
majority of the cases too little active cooperation is taking place. There is just co-existence of
the learning venues and there is missing a good co-ordination of the learning and working
activities, for exp. under German VET schools and enterprises, while active communication
under trainers and teachers is taking place to rarely.
What does it mean for vocational students when schools and enterprises do not talk with each
other? Good cooperation means that the learner (e.g. apprentice, student or trainee) could get
a deeper understanding (in theoretical and practical terms) of the professional field he is
situated. Better interaction between work place experiences and systematic, theory based
learning at school is a good condition for this.
Departing from that assumption I will try to make clear how the cooperation of the learning
venues is influencing the professional performance of the students. Possible path ways of
learning are to be encountered at the school as well at the companies. This is concluded by the
provision of formative tools for self-development. Tools of that kind support self evaluation of
the actors involved. They can participate in a self investigation about their current cooperation
practise and to find out where are action points for improvements.

Collaboration of the learning venues: Where are the problems?

The debate about the collaboration of the learning venues has received much interest in those
countries with an dual traditions, like Germany, Danmark, Suisse, or Austria. But also in
European countries with an additive or alternance structures, cooperation is discussed. This
because schools want to teach in accordance with labour market and business process needs
and intend to follow much more work process learning. They are many example like the
Nordic countries (Finland, Sweden, Norway); but as well countries like France, Spain,
Ireland, Italy etc., in which the transition of students from the vocational school to the
company is discussed in its quantities and qualities (Stenström, Tynjäla, 2008).

But first I like to discuss the implication from the dual system onto the cooperation issue.
Dual arrangements mean first of all a public (publicly offered vocational education) and
private (private in-company training) learning and working engagement of the apprentice
students (Greinert 1994, Deissinger 1996). This forces company and school actors to
communicate with each other because the school programme (classroom learning) and the

1
company work programme (on the job learning) in the company are running in parallel and
would need a good coordination.

The productivity of the apprentice can be braught up to a 50 to 70 % productivity when there

is a good co-ordination of the work place learning and the classroom learning at school. This
was found out in a recent study in the Land of North-Rhine Westfalia (Reformwerkstatt
Berufliche Bildung, NRW). A good case is given when practical and theoretical learning is
integrated. This supports the professional development of the learner (here in many cases an
apprentice student).

Main critics argue that in the majority of the cases coordinated action of school and enterprise
does not take place. In many cases there is only co-existence but no active co-ordination of
the learning programmes in the school and the enterprise. Co-existence means that school and
company know each other but there is no active link between teachers in the school and
trainers in the company. Learning at the school is not seen as well integrated into what and
how the apprentice is learning at the work place. Good partnership practice could mean that
the more theoretical and systematic learning processes at school are deepening the practical
experiences made by the apprentice at the work place in industry, service or the craft trade
company. Systematic and theory-based knowledge development in the school is understood
by the student as relevant knowledge which helps him to understand what he does and act in
the company. The learning effectiveness decreases when there is just to be “silent” (so to say
on “stock learning” or bulk learning) learning. This would means that what is learned does not
stay in relation to the students other learning processes out side the school. But conceptual
knowledge could help to understand better the practical dimension of work. Projects in which
the students work on a problem case could help to make this learning more interactive.

Based on recent studies a regional survey can illustrate this. Over 2000 students in the town
and county of Bremerhaven-Wesermünde were asked how they access their own working and
learning situation in their learning company and vocational school. Only in a third of the cases
the relation between training company and local school has been coordinated well and fully
satisfying. Projects under these partners take place only very seldom (3%). In over 90 % only
knowing and taking notice of each other is the typical pattern of cooperation under the school
and company partners. When teachers and trainers talk they mostly talk about the student’s
absence at school; only in 35 % other more contented topics (like students performance,
topics of learning or curricular questions) are discussed. Another result covers the point how
the school are receiving the companies in which the students are trained. Only in 10 % they
are fully happy in about what the school undertakes in the classroom teaching. In over 30 %
of the relationships the companies and their apprentices are still not satisfied about the
teaching deliveries of the vocational school. This explains why in 13 % the image of the
school is regarded as bad and in close relation to this by over 30 %. Only 4% of the apprentice
students access the quality of learning venues cooperation as good; in 30% in a satisfactory
fashion and in 67% of the cases the synchronisation of the school versus company learning is
seen as not satisfactory and in an problematic condition (13 %). (Rauner, Heinemann 2008)

Programme strategies to develop a closer interaction in local VET

communities
In the following I like to discuss strategies for both institutional partners to overcome a weak
coordination of the learning venues. Because we are confronted with trainers and teachers
who are now expected to co-operate and to develop a better integrated curriculum. Learning
partnerships between industry and school affiliate partners from different institutions but the

2
partners follow different understandings and orientations. Teachers may be orientated on
school based knowledge and a more systematic learning than their partners from industry.
These orient their work on practical problems and the apprentices’ work tasks (Deitmer/
Heinemann 2008).
The more complex the partnership, the larger the network and diversity of interests of the
actors, the more easily such difficulties arise. They wish to co-operate better in their learning
partnership but they lack experiences and conceptual knowledge. Formative evaluation may
help them to improve their co-operation (Manske et. al., 2002; Smits/ Kuhlmann, 2003,
Deitmer, Heinemann et. al. 2003, pp. 111 ).

An integrated development plan which contains some measures could help to improve the
cooperation practise. In the centre of these plans stays the adaptation of evaluation approaches
to support the development of a more interactive and vital co-operation amongst teachers and
trainers. I will suggest some activity fields which could help to make the cooperation of
companies and schools better. The plan could concentrate on the following activity areas:

Competence based curricula

Improving the curricula can be seen as a big momentum to improve the quality of Learning at
the enterprise and the school. The vocational disciplines of the profession (e.g. for the field of
the Kaufmann; business administration, book-keeping, law and correspondence) are based on
work and learning tasks which depart from learning situations to be found at the work places
in industry or commerce. This curricular model should give the apprentice a more coherent
and holistic understanding of what he can learn at work and how learning at school can
complement this.
In this respect we face a paradigmatic shift from discipline base curricula towards work
process related and competence based curricula. In this respect the Lernfeld approach refers to
the European debate about work process knowledge (Boreham 2002, Fischer, Bauer 2007)
This transformation from significant work processes to learning situations entails a complex
series of steps beginning with analysis of the work activity and the required competencies,
followed by competence based curricula and ending with the design of work process related
situations. Different concepts were established for analyzing work processes and occupational
task as well as different models for developing curricula. There is still a lack of appropriate
methods in qualification research focused on curriculum development (Fischer, Bauer 2007,
143).
However the article is not discussing the different conceptual guidelines for the design of
work based curricula (To be noted here the approaches of Reinhard Bader (Bader 2003) or
that of a VET researcher/ teacher team at the University of Bremen, ITB (Reinhold et.al.
2002)). Work based curricula are not only effecting on the re-design of the curricular
frameworks but also personal and organisational development of trainers and teachers and
their institutions. With learning arenas and work based learning teachers and trainers are
directly involved into the design of the curricula to develop a logical progression from the
area of learning to the occupational area, in a circular process. (Sloane 2004, Fischer, Bauer
2007).
Therefore a major challenge for this reform is the creation of active, trans-institutional teams
of teachers and trainers. The knowledge flow and the swing of theory and practice have to be
re-organized by them. Therefore the reform is not just a new pedagogical process it’s also an
institutional and personal transformation. What is learned in the classroom shall get into
closer contact with what is learned in practice, or in other words, learning in the classroom
shall enable the apprentice to take a much closer relationship to his company’s real work tasks
and business processes. Learning for and by problem solving instead of following text books
is part of this approach

3
Setting up of cross institutional curriculum teams
This could work in such a way that the vocational schools have to activate their co-operation
by creating cross-institutional working groups. In these teams both the industrial trainers and
instructors and teachers are forced to identify ´integral work and learning tasks` in their
occupational field. These teams would have to develop the programmes at the school in detail
and would be supported by a new curricular framework which is based on competence
descriptions.
Curricula of that kind have not only effects on the re-design of the curricular frameworks but
affecting also the professional development of trainers and teachers, because the teaching and
training staff have to understand how to handle this new method of learning and teaching.
Learning situations have to be identified and developed out of the work process, i.e. one has
to identify the potential work tasks offer for learning and how these tasks can be arranged into
a curriculum.

Bringing vocational school into a better cooperation mode with the local industries
To be equipped for a closer cooperation with industry, the schools have to move from being
traditional vocational schools into more autonomous centres for initial and continuous work-
based learning in their local environment concerned. More autonomy for the regional training
and development centres which foster regional learning in networks (network learning
approach) is an answer to this. Since May 2002 in the regional VET system of Bremen, which
encompasses 22 VET schools, a six year long pilot programme on school autonomy and
regional networking of work and learning partnerships is undertaken (Kurz et.al. 2007). The
Bremen VET schools are transformed into semi-autonomous vocational competence centres.
This is also the case at many other schools as part of new public management policy schemes
and by the assembly of the educational ministries in the 16 German Laenders (Bund-Laender
Kommission 2001). The goal is to better prepare the local schools for the development of
learning partnerships with the local industries. The educational provisions of the schools shall
be improved by developing new school programmes. This programme shall strengthen work
place learning and guarantee a better interaction between theory and practice and work and
learning. The re-organisation is carried through by internal teams within the schools which in
some cases also include the trainers from industry.

From local training partnerships to regional innovation networks and the importance of
an regional VET dialogue
To make Knowledge development in these above described partnerships between schools and
companies more innovative it is necessary to open up the partnerships for innovation themes
and topics. Such regional networks for qualification and learning are based on partnerships
between enterprises and regional ‘knowledge institutions’ including universities, polytechnics,
R&D institutes, technology transfer centres, and vocational education and training providers
(Deitmer/Attwell, 2000, Deitmer, Gerds 2002).
Such activities are embedded in a regional VET policy dialogue with the main purpose of
measures designed to modify VET collaboration practice in towards work based learning and
the needs of the regional stakeholders, like companies, schools. However, this can be linked
with regional innovation in two ways: on one hand the VET dialogue (as an example for this
see: Bremer Senator für Bildung 1999, Rauner, Heinemann et.al. 2008) and the intended
improvement in VET can be seen as an active part of regional development and/or the
development of the innovative capability of regions; on the other hand it can mean that the
development of VET requires a dialogue, i.e. integration into the economic and job-related
development of the region. Therefore there is a direct link between the concepts of regional

4
VET dialogue, learning region and regional innovation networks. By integrating technical or
business management VET colleges into these networks future qualification demands can be
transferred to an earlier stage into the courses of the college. This way of linking up with
regional innovation networks helps to integrate the learning dimension into innovative
developments (Manske et. al. 2001).

The widening of the learning arrangements in terms of work place learning within these
regional networks would increase professional competencies for the students while they get
better access to knowledge created outside the school or the companies training centre. This
means not only for a better uptake of already known knowledge it should also allow them too
to increase they innovation competencies. This means that the students have learned how to
work on a problem constellation derived from industry. By problem or practice base learning
VET students transform this approach to other work situations. The way they have learned has
an impact on their problem solving capacity and their capacity for innovative skills. These
innovation competencies can indeed allow more flexibility and better address customer
demand or quality requirements. Or in other words the student’s capacity to transfer the ones
learned problem solving strategy to other challenges has improved. This goes also for the
ability to work in teams and networks. This helps the clients of VET - the students and later to
be the skilled workers - to actively take part in the shaping of innovation processes (see as a
reference base the training cases identified and analysed in the innovative network project:
Rauner, Heinemann, et.al. 2008, Deitmer 2008).

Evaluation Tools to analyse and reconstruct the cooperation’s under local partners
At this point, i want to give an account of the development of two self-evaluation tools that
aim at analysing learning processes – the empowerment evaluation tool that was developed in
the Covoseco project1 and the Sevalag tool developed for the specifically German context of
co-operation between schools and enterprises in the dual system.
Evaluation of the partnership and its management: EE-Tool
The EE tool (Empowerment Evaluation) contributes both to the evaluation and improvement
of learning partnerships. The tool grew from experiences while undertaking assessments in
regional and national R&D programmes (Manske et. al. 2002, Deitmer 2004). The aim of this
type of evaluation is to assist the actors to access their individual and collective perceptions of
co-operation, in order to find out what is going or not going well. In other words, the
evaluation method tries to look into the ‘black box’ of the innovation process itself and the
learning taking place. The EE tool integrated different value perspectives: Internal
Evaluation of the learning partnership in order to improve the cooperation. This means
supporting cooperative learning under teachers and trainers within the partnership by
identifying strength/weaknesses in respect to aspects like goals, resources, project
management, partnership development and communication & learning. External Evaluation
to give evidence in relation to other similar cases. This is understood by providing a
concise summary of what was said at the self-evaluation, the results from the internal
evaluation session are validated by an external perspective. In some cases, this could also
allow the comparison of the project to other partnerships which are in a similar process
Evaluating the linkage between theoretical and work-place learning: Sevalag
The evaluation tool Sevalag (Selbstevaluation von Lern- und Arbeitsaufgaben - self-
evaluation of work and learning tasks) was developed by the Institut Technik und Bildung at
Bremen University (see Howe/Bauer 2001). Its purpose is to evaluate the co-operation of
workplace learning partnerships in terms of its content. This co-operation works by jointly
1
The Covoseco project looked at formative evaluation tools to assist private public partnerships (PPPs) . The
approach was tested in 15 PPP projects in five countries (Germany, France, Sweden, Slovenia and the UK). For
more details see: www.itb.uni-bremen.de/projekte/covoseco.

5
developing Lern- und Arbeitsaufgaben (LAA; work and learning tasks). These practical tasks
are especially designed to integrate the more general knowledge acquired at school and the
knowledge oriented to work processes acquired on the job. A team of teachers and trainers
jointly designs these tasks. The same team afterwards evaluates them using the instrument.
The instrument focuses on content and design process of the learning tasks and is offering
possibilities for further enhancement. It evaluates work and learning tasks in respect to eight
different categories. Regarding the tasks’ content, these are quality of the task, potentials for
learning, potentials for shaping work (Gestaltung), and co-operation between school and
enterprise; regarding the apprentices' learning, the categories are results of learning and work,
success, competence for shaping (Gestaltungskompetenz), and the apprentice’s integration
into school and work. These categories were derived from research on vocational learning and
teaching processes. They each comprise different sub-categories that link concrete work and
learning tasks and the more general criteria. Some examples are: degree of new knowledge
acquired, quality of the final product or service, exploring possibilities of alternative design,
cooperation, communication, and team skills, and so on.
Case Study: Arcelor/Mittal Steelworks Bremen
The Sevalag tool was further adapted by Arcelor/Mittal Steel Bremen and the vocational
college Vegesack, Bremen, to strengthen co-operation between VET-school and training at the
workplace (see Timmermann 2006). One trainer and two VET teachers designed the work and
learning task and afterwards jointly evaluated it. The 21 apprentices carrying out the task were
asked to fill in a questionnaire comprising the same main and sub-categories as the tool.
The evaluation procedure was similar to the EE-tool. Participants rated the different sub-
categories and discussed their ratings providing reasons for their individual judgements and
aiming at consensus. Because of the work load, the participants did not weight their criteria.
The trainers’ and teachers’ self evaluation acts along the central question: Does an LAA help
to develop knowledge and competences along the lines of a work based curriculum which is
based on activities and is targeted towards qualifying learning processes in work
organisations?

Main Results:
The Sevalag tool aims at structuring the development of work and learning tasks as well as
accompanying the whole process in order to fully use the learning potentials for students,
trainers and teachers inherent to these tasks.
Patton's (1997) 'process value' of evaluation mentioned above, i.e. learning effects because of
undergoing evaluation, no matter what concrete results the process shows, is quite strong
here. The very act of vocational teachers and enterprise's trainers to not only design a work
and learning task, but afterwards jointly reflecting on it was seen as having a major impact by
all participants.
Not weighting criteria has been seen as a weakness of the process, though necessary for
pragmatic reasons. One has to secure enough manpower for this kind of evaluation. In our
case study, the participants had been so absorbed by the task of developing the work and
learning task, explaining it to the apprentices, accompanying the process of carrying it
through in different ways and finally evaluating it, that there was simply no more time left. To
fully exploit the tool's potentials, the participants nonetheless would have to undergo such a
process, elaborating what criteria are how important, when weaknesses may be neglected or
taken serious, if weaknesses are inherent to the work and learning task or because of external
circumstances, and so on.

6
Making use of web 2 tools
Another source to help to improve the cooperation are web 2 tools. This medium could be
further developed to help the students and teacher to coordinate work and learning task. All
actors involved can get access to this medium: vet students, teachers, trainers and the entire
one involved in the management of mentoring of students etc. So far it has been difficult to
support the decentralised learning at diverse worksites (in the company and at the vocational
schools) or the self-organised learning processes of trainees (when for example school and
companies want to run projects for their students) without effective web-based
communication media. In a similar way it has been difficult to develop synergy between
parallel learning activities or to make use of external knowledge resources without
appropriate web-based support facilities.
Cooperation activities could be supported by equipping the partnerships of student, trainers
and teachers by tools. This in such a way that
• individual learners can relate their individual learning to professional development,
• groups of learners can coordinate their internal and external cooperation and
information exchange,
• trainers can supervise decentralised learning at the workplace (and to link the
contributions of learners top common goals) and
• teachers of vocational colleges can to link their teaching to workplace-based learning
processes.

Conclusion
The potential of the above presented tools (self evaluation, web 2) should enable their use for
a more general context outside the German dual system as well. They can accompany
processes where learning and working meet and mesh, helping to identify learning potentials
of work tasks as well as supporting the collaboration of actors with pedagogical and work
backgrounds. As we know from theories of situated learning as well as from practice in
different countries, making use of the potentials for learning inherent to work tasks to
integrate work and learning is a general challenge that extends beyond countries using the
dual system as well as beyond initial VET.

Involving all stakeholders of the learning processes has not been carried out to its full
potential in the development of these two tools as well. From an evaluation point of view (and
according to newer theories of teaching and learning), it would be important to involve the
learners themselves into the process, too. There have been pragmatic reasons for not doing so,
as both tools rely on focused discussions and cannot easily be expanded to large groups of
users. But to include learners and empowering them to judge about their own learning
certainly will be a focus of the tools’ further development.

This presentation has discussed research-related tools in developing partnership cooperation

and workplace learning. The following final remarks link this preparation to some lessons
from the WLP project (and from other predecessor projects):
• Development of sustainable workplace learning partnerships cannot be based on pre-
given formats. Instead, the cooperation has to be based on mutual interests and
mutually complementing roles in the training and learning activities. The evaluation of
these activities is an important tool to give basis of better coordination of these
activities.
• The introduction of web resources cannot be based on the assumption that pre-defined
e-learning platforms or e-portfolios could be used as readily developed ‘packages’ that
take over the steering of teaching-learning processes. Instead, web resources will have

7
 a complementary role in supporting the teaching-learning activities by the students and
the teaching personal.
• The introduction of different web applications and services (e.g. weblogs, wikis, e-
portfolios) should not give primary attention to the tools. Instead, the tools should be
introduced by using them to facilitate individual, group-based and networked learning
activities (or related pedagogic support measures). The introductory measures should
empower the users with the set of tools that they consider appropriate for the
development of their training activities.
• Altogether, the use of different tools and facilities should help the trainers and learners
to make better use of existing learning resources and to share knowledge on ongoing
teaching-learning activities and of achieved results. In this respect the tools should
help the users to create common pools of knowledge and make them transparent for
other desired users.

Bund-Länder-Kommission (2001): Kompetenzzentren in regionalen Berufsbildungsnetzwerken –

Rolle und Beitrag der beruflichen Schulen. [Competence Centres for Regional Vocational
Education and Training Networks – Role and Contribution of VET schools] Bericht der BLK.
Heft 92, Bonn
DeGEvaL Gesellschaft für Evaluationsforschung (e.V.) (2002) Summary of Evaluation Standards
(DeGEval-Standards) http://www.degeval.de
Deissinger T (1996) Germany's Vocational Training Act: its function as an instrument of quality
control within a tradition-based vocational training system. Oxford Review of Education, vol
22, pp 317-336. Number 3
Deitmer, L. ; Davoine, E.; Floren, H.; Heinemann, L.; Hofmaier, B.; James, C.; Manske, F.; Ursic, D.;
Turner, L. Improving the European Knowledge Base through formative and participative
Evaluation of Science-Industry Liaisons and Public-Private Partnerships(PPP) in R&D. Final
Report of COVOSECO thematic network project, EU STRATA 5th framework programme,
Bremen: University of Bremen, 2003.
Deitmer, Ludger (2008) Chancen und Nutzen eines regionalen Berufsbildungsdialogs. Felix Rauner,
Dorothea Piening (HG.) Innovative Berufsbildung. Auf die Attraktivität für Jugendliche und
Unternehmen kommt es an! (im Druck)
Deitmer, L. Management regionaler Innovationsnetzwerke. Evaluation als Ansatz zur
Effizienzsteigerung regionaler Innovationsprozesse. [Management of Regional Innovation
Networks] Baden-Baden: Nomos, Band 12, 2004.
Deitmer, L., Fischer, M., Gerds, P., Przygodda, K., Rauner, F., Ruch, H., Schwarzkopf, K., Zöller, A.
(2004). Neue Lernkonzepte in der dualen Berufsausbildung. Bilanz eines
Modellversuchsprogramms. [New learning approaches in the German Dual Vocational
Education and Training. Summary Evaluation Report of the German Laender VET innovation
programme “New Learning Approaches within the German Dual VET System”.] Bielefeld: W.
Bertelsmann
Deitmer, L., Gerds, P. (2002). Developing a regional dialogue on VET and training, in: Kämaräinen,
P., Attwell, G.. and Brown, A. (eds.) (2002). Transformation of learning in education and
training. Key qualifications revisited. Office for Official Publications of the European
Communities, European Centre for the development of Vocational Training, Cedefop.
Luxemburg.
Deitmer, L.; Attwell, G. (2000): Partnership and Networks: a Dynamic Approach to Learning in
Regions. Nyhan, B.; Attwell, G.; Deitmer, L., (eds.) Towards the Learning Region. Education
and Regional Innovation in the European Union and the United States, CEDEFOP,
Thessaloniki. S. 61-70.
Deitmer, L.; Heinemann, L.: Evaluation Approaches for Workplace Learning Partnerships in VET:
How to Investigate the Learning Dimension? In: Stenström, M.-L; Tynjälä P. TOWARDS
INTEGRATION OF WORK AND LEARNING - Strategies for Connectivity and
Transformation, Dordrecht: Springer International (forthcoming)

8
Fahrenkrog, G./Polt, W./Rojo, J./Türke, A./Zinöcker, K. (eds.) (2002): RTD Evaluation Toolbox, IPTS
Technical Report Series, Brussels
Fischer, M., Bauer, W. (2007) Competing approaches towards work process orientation in German
curriculum development, European Journal of Vocational Training, No. 40, pp. 140 – 154,
ISSN 1977-0219 Vol 1
Greinert W. D. (1994) The German system of vocational training. History, Organization, Prospects.
Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Howe, F., Bauer, W. (2001) (Selbst-) Evaluation gestaltungsorientierter Lern- und Arbeitsaufgaben,
[(Self-) Evaluation of shaping oriented learning and working tasks] in: Petersen, W., Rauner,
F., Stuber, F. (Eds.): IT-gestützte Facharbeit – Gestaltungsorientierte Berufsbildung, Baden-
Baden: NOMOS, 385-401
Kurz, S., Schulz, J. & Zelger, J. (2007). "GABEK als Methode zur kollegialen
Organisationsentwicklung". ["GABEK” - a collective method for school development in VET
schools.] http://www.rebiz-bremen.de
Manske, F., Moon, Y.-G., Ruth, K., Deitmer, L.: Ein prozess- und akteurorientiertes
Evaluationsverfahren als Reflexionsmedium und Selbststeuerungsinstrument für
Innovationsprozesse. [The process and actor oriented evaluation approach as a medium for
reflection and decision-making in innovation processes] Zeitschrift für Evaluation. ISSN
1619-5515. Heft 2. 2002, 245 - 263
Patton, M.Q. (1997) Utilization-focused evaluation; the century text, Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Reformwerkstatt Berufliche Bildung, NRW, Minister of Labour in North-Rhine Westfalia, Duesseldorf
2008
Rauner, F, Heinemann, L., et al; Final report of the IBB 2010 project, forthcoming, Bremen
Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik
Deutschland (Hrsg.), (1999): Handreichungen für die Erarbeitung von Rahmenlehrplänen der
Kultusministerkonferenz (KMK) für den berufsbezogenen Unterricht in der Berufsschule und
ihre Abstimmung mit Ausbildungsordnungen des Bundes für anerkannte Ausbildungsberufe,
Bonn [Guidelines for the development of new curricula by the KMK for vocational teaching
in German VET schools and their relation to vocational training profiles of the Federal
Government]
Sloane, P. (2004) The application transfer between Schools and Enterprises in the German Dual
System: putting it into practise. In: Regina Mulder & Peter F.E. Sloane; New Approaches to
Vocational Education in Europe – the construction of complex learning-teaching
arrangements, Oxford: Symposium
Smits, R./Kuhlmann, St. Strengthening Interfaces in Innovation Systems: Rationale, Concepts and
(new) Instruments. In: European Commission (ed): Science & Technology policies in Europe;
New Challenges and New Responses Proceedings of the STRATA Consolidating Workshop.
Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2003, p. 306.
Stenström, M.-L; Tynjälä P. TOWARDS INTEGRATION OF WORK AND LEARNING - Strategies
for Connectivity and Transformation, Dordrecht: Springer International (forthcoming)
Timmermann, Uwe (2005) Untersuchung eines Selbstevaluationsinstrumentes, [Reflections on a
teachers’ and trainers’ instrument for self evaluation] Bremen: ITB, unpublished manuscript.