No abstract

On the macro level (federal level) and exo level (state or regional level), the German Dual Apprenticeship System shows a high degree of institutionalised collaboration. However, the companies and vocational schools on the meso level (institutional level and level of the actors), in contrast, are just loosely coupled with a dominant partner (i.e., companies) and a subordinate partner (i.e., vocational schools). How and why these structures have emerged, established and stabilised is part of a complex historical, societal and economical process. The historical developmental will be elaborated in the article. The term ‘dual system’ was invented in Germany in the 1960s, and the intention was to emphasise equal responsibilities, partnership of equals, lively encounters and close collaboration between companies and schools. This vision is not yet a reality, as the presented empirical survey demonstrates. A majority of companies do not or rather seldom collaborate with ‘their’ vocational schools. 74.2% of the companies do not or seldom coordinate their work, and 93% of the companies do not or seldom cooperate with the vocational schools. The German Dual Apprentice­ship System operates on the actual meso level just on the basis of less than 30% of its potentiality. The term ‘parallel systems’ seems to be more appropriate to characterise the actual situation on the meso level than the term ‘dual system’.

Purpose: The growing public interest in vocational education and training (VET), most recently since the economic crisis of 2007/2008, has led to an exponential increase in articles with a vocational focus, underscoring the need for review studies for the purposes of systematic knowledge aggregation, clarification and interpretation. We assume that review studies follow the same minimum standards as other research methods: the review must be at least reproducible and thus the results verifiable or falsifiable. So far, however, the review methods used in VET research have not been investigated. Our purpose is to review the review procedures and methods used in published reviews of VET research to identify their current methodological quality. Approach: To classify the review studies, we initially developed a conceptual framework to distinguish different types of reviews. We then developed a methodological framework to assess the review methods used. Overall, to accelerate the review process, our review of reviews (or umbrella review) followed the rapid review approach: we limited our search to reviews in English published between 2014 and 2019 in peer-reviewed journals with a substantial VET focus and indexed in Scopus and/or Web of Science. Therefore, we did not examine all existing reviews in the field of VET research. Rather, our specific focus was on a core sector of scientific research: peer-reviewed articles in curated databases. Furthermore, we concentrated on the review procedures and methods used, not on the content of the reviews. Findings: We identified nine journals with a substantial VET focus, yielding a total of 1,283 published articles between 2014 and 2019, of which only 19 articles (1.48%) were literature reviews. Of these 19 reviews, six were excluded from our umbrella review because of unclear methodological procedures. Based on the review typology we developed, five of the remaining 13 reviews were conceptual in nature, four were scoping reviews, three were evidence-oriented, and one was critical in nature. None of the reviews examined focused on meta-syntheses, research methods or meta-analyses. In total, this resulted in current review gaps with respect to theory generation (meta-synthesis), practice of theory elaboration and testing (methodological review) and the determination of overall effects across single studies (meta-analysis). Finally, our examination of the reviews showed that their scope was mostly clearly presented. However, with regard to the process steps ‘data selection’ and ‘data processing’, only a few reviews fully met the requirements of the methodological framework.Conclusion: Our review leads to four conclusions. 1) More systematic syntheses are needed because there is a substantial quantitative gap in review research. 2) In particular, there is a need for review studies with a focus on meta-synthesis, research methods and meta-analysis, as there is a current gap in these areas. 3) Reviews should be based on a review methodology with transparent and reproducible methods and verifiable or falsifiable results. The high number of subjective syntheses with unclear review procedures indicates that this mindset is not yet fully established in the field of VET research. 4) In the studies examined, there is a high degree of heterogeneity regarding to the accuracy and completeness of the methodological steps and data. The conceptual and methodological frameworks developed for the analysis can serve as guidelines for the conduct of reviews, and thus, the frameworks could contribute to the further development of the methodological basis of reviews.

The design of vocational didactics has to meet special requirements. Six core assumptions are identified: outcome orientation, cultural-historical embedding, horizontal structure, vertical structure, temporal structure, and the changing nature of work. Different approaches and discussions from school-based systems (Spain and Sweden) and dual systems (Denmark, Germany and Norway) are presented in this special issue. From an inside or national perspective, the solutions show a high cultural-historical dependency. From an outside or cross-national perspective, contingency and alternative possibilities become visible. The combination of both perspectives could enable continuity as well as innovation. This is the basic assumption of the presented collection about vocational didactics.

The "Riga Conclusions" of the European Ministries of Education of 22 June 2015 for the orientation of vocational education and training in Europe are promoting work-based learning as one of five "medium-term deliverables" for the next five years. But: How should and can work-based teaching and learning be designed? Our approach was developed within the German Dual VET System. Therefore it is not surprising that the work reality is for us the major principle for designing curricula and learning settings. As a starting point for developing didactical measures in the field of vocational education and training it is crucial in this approach to identify practices, routines and experiences of skilled workers that are experts for what they are doing. What are those people doing when handling a task, how are they acting, what work objects and tools are they operating with, and what requirements do they have to be aware of? To answer these kinds of questions, the real work in practice must be explored. A useful approach for doing this is a vocational work process analysis. The next step comprises developing a workbased learning project for the classroom. These two steps, vocational work process analysis and work-based learning projects, build the core of the article and enable a grounded work-based learning. Additional the changing priorities of curriculum design in the last century are introduced to reach a better understanding of the background and the actual work-oriented focus in German Dual VET. Our key proposition is: If work-based learning in vocational schools is wanted, the gap between the reality of work and the formal learning settings has to be closed.