The relevance of work-based learning (WBL) as a central element of TVET for improving the quality of TVET programs is increasingly being taken up in international education policy. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the International Labour Organization (ILO) and the World Bank Group (WBG) as well as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) promote the strengthening of WBL in the context of the establishment or further development of TVET systems. WBL in that sense primarily addresses the requirement to increase the labour market relevance through phases of experiential learning at the workplace. In such context, the quality of work with regard to its conduciveness to learning i.e. competence development is decisive. Learning at the in-company workplace – in the meaning of this article – is not to be seen as a result of didactical intervention, but as a consequence of changing work organisation, the digitalization of work, and an increasing quality of work conducive to learning and competence development.

This article presents models of WBL that reflect the proximity to the workplace, the quality of work with regard to its conduciveness to learning, and in-company learning concepts The article concludes with remarks on the company’s training personnel, who play a key role in successfully designing WBL.

Keywords: TVET, work-based learning, work-related learning, in-company learning

1        Introduction

Work-based learning (WBL) is increasingly becoming a central requirement of TVET policy internationally (Schröder 2020). It is characterized by the fact that formal and institutional vocational education processes are conceptually enriched with labour market-relevant, informal hands-on learning at a company’s workplace or organized learning is combined with practical experience. For WBL as a model of learning based on the world of work, three forms can be identified: “apprenticeship training (dual vocational training)¸ school based vocational training with learning phases at the workplace”, and “WBL in school” (NA at BIBB 2017, 6).

The obvious and frequently cited advantages are a greater labour market relevance of vocational training and an improved transition of acquired competences on entering employment. In view of the enormous challenges facing vocational education and training systems worldwide in the coming decade (ILO 2017a), it is only logical that international organisations such as UNESCO, World Bank Group (WBG) and the International Labour Organisation (ILO) as well as the OECD have included the conceptual integration of work-based learning in their agendas whilst strategically positioning their educational policy and promotion thereof accordingly (UNESCO 2016, ILO 2017b, & ILO/WBG 2013).

A further development of the more modern approach to work-based learning is to link it to formal vocational training processes and qualifications. In international discussions, the focus is often on legal requirements, incentives for stakeholders and governance structures (UNECO-UNEVOC 2013, IAG-TVET 2017, & Hoftijzer et al. 2018). Organisational and structural designs and conceptual approaches, relating to apprenticeship, for example, are extremely diverse. The number of countries with work-based learning approaches is surprisingly large, in the regional area of the European Training Foundation (ETF) alone (Sweet 2014). However, the lack of uniform definitions and concepts hinders the systematic development and implementation of work-based learning at the international level.

Work-based learning has a long tradition in the academic discussion of vocational and occupational education; over the years it has been conceptually sharpened, typologically differentiated, tested in practice and conceptually developed. In this form, WBL goes beyond state governance structures, stakeholder organisation and legal foundations. Rather, it addresses the preconditions for efficient competence acquisition at the learning base of the company in dealing with specific work tasks and processes from the point of view of the conduciveness of work to learning (Dehnbostel 2008a; Schröder & Dehnbostel 2019). Conduciveness of work to learning requires a quality that is appropriate to the learners’ level of competence development, as not just any work activity in the company can be guaranteed to contribute to competence development.

In addition to the organisation of work, central elements to support learning in work are the quality and level of qualification of in-company training personnel, i.e. the in-company trainers or instructors for initial or advanced TVET, or skilled workers providing initial and further training. In many English-language publications, in-company trainers or trainer for practice, who focus on skills development, are referred to as TVET teachers. In-company training staff must have the necessary expertise for in-company work, in terms of work organisation, processes and quality of work. It is up to them to decide which of the different forms of workplace learning can best be implemented at the work place. At the same time, digitalisation opens up a range of further perspectives for additional work-based forms of learning. TVET teachers – in contrast to TVET trainers – have to fulfil a different function, as they are primarily focused on technical education, permeability and lifelong learning. Both groups of TVET personnel are relevant for a high quality TVET system.

This paper discusses the potential of the workplace as a place of learning, especially from the point of view of digitalisation, models of work-based learning, work design that is conducive to competence development, and concepts for workplace learning. In-company training staff, TVET instructors and trainers as well as education and training professionals have a key role to play in workplace learning and in the implementation of the WBL concept on the company side.

2        The Workplace as a Learning Venue

The potential of the workplace as a place of learning for an individual’s competence development is unique in comparison with other places of learning. Learning at the workplace is the oldest and most widespread form of vocational learning. Located at the place of work, it relates to the respective object of work and occurs in the process of working. Work-based learning is accomplished when the place of learning and the place of work are identical. It therefore describes a local and task-specific area of learning that combines working and learning from a didactic-methodological point of view. However, this also shows the tension between economic or operational expediency and subject- and education-related objectives that underlie the dual function of the workplace as a place of work and learning.

Learning in the workplace already existed in the form of craft apprenticeships in the Europe of the Middle Ages. There was a clear structure of occupational levels, divided into master, journeyman and apprentice. In a master apprenticeship, learning was done by watching, imitating, participating, helping, trying and simulating. From the point of view of modern vocational education and training, learning in the workplace was first considered with the development of education in the 18th century and then more systematically in the course of industrialisation (Stratmann 1993; Greinert 1994). In industrial society with Taylorist work structures based on division of labour and monotonous, repetitive work activities, learning at the workplace became less important. The workplace could hardly serve as a place of learning in well-planned industrial work processes.

Since the emergence of new work and organisational concepts and the beginnings of digitization in the 1970s/1980s, learning in and at work has undergone a fundamental change that equally encompasses its goals, content, forms and methods. With increased learning potential and increased qualification and competence requirements, the workplace as a place of learning has gained in importance again, which is among other things in the formula of “learning in the process of work” and the introduction of work-integrated forms of learning organization such as learning islands and work and learning tasks (Schröder & Dehnbostel 2019, 7 ff.).

Increased learning opportunities in general and opportunities at the workplace as a place of learning in particular can make learning attractive to those who have developed inhibitions, or resistance to learning and refuse to learn in organized situations. The benefits for socially disadvantaged young people with poor school experience become particularly clear in parttime qualification for young adults and in further training measures for older employees. Ideally, the workplace as a place of learning creates motivation, brings meaning and insight, incorporates experience and subjective dispositions, enabling development and illuminating career paths.

In summary, the advantages and disadvantages of learning at the workplace can be listed in a tabular comparison as follows:

Table 1: Advantages and disadvantages of learning at the workplace (Dehnbostel 2010)

Learning at the workplace is intensifying as digitalisation progresses; informal learning in particular is contributing to an increase in learning, process and reflection in relation to work at the workplace. In the process, learning is becoming less restricted in terms of time, place and space; it is no longer limited to individual sequences, and certainly not to formal, institutionalised education. Employees are increasingly using interactive learning opportunities and e-learning forms such as blended learning, webinars, learning platforms, mobile learning and augmented learning. The focus is on the process of work, as digital technologies increasingly become digital media in human-machine interaction.

Digital learning thus becomes a constitutive component of digital work at the workplace as integrated learning. It mainly takes place as purely informal learning, subject to the logic of the work process. Informal learning at work involves experiences made in and through work actions. It produces a learning outcome that results from coping with situations and solving problems at work. Studies indicate that, 60-80 per cent of a skilled worker’s actions related to competence and professionalism in a company are based on informal learning processes. This percentage, which can be differentiated for specific sectors and companies, generally increases with the digitalisation of work processes.

The importance of informal learning also marks the serious difference between digital work and the division of labour and repetitive work of the traditional industrial age. This was – for technological and business reasons – removed from all claims to learning and innovation; it was planned and ordered to the exclusion of situations of uncertainty, self-control and learning. In principle, working and learning were separate in Taylorist work processes, whereas, with digital work, they are integrated in the workplace. Thus, digital learning as work-integrated learning is a milestone in the history of modern qualification. Establishing informal and non-formal learning on an equal footing with formal learning in the European Qualifications Framework (EQF), as confirmed in 2008, is a ground-breaking, unequivocal expression of this development.

The continuing pluralisation and dissolution of workplace learning boundaries is reflected in the expansion of workplace learning spaces and their extension to include physical and virtual learning architectures. The workplace as a place of learning is thus becoming a site of meta-learning. The learning concepts outlined in section 4 are increasingly finding their way into workplace learning and are adding purpose and direction.

3        Models of work-related and work-based learning

Neither in VET research nor in related disciplines has there been an analysis and inventory of models or types of learning at work and – more broadly – learning with reference to work. In contrast to the work-based learning described at the beginning, the relationship between learning and work is not considered from the perspective of institutionalised vocational education and training, but from the perspective of the workplace and work as a place of learning.

A uniform typology is also difficult to establish, as this is presented differently from the perspective of different academic disciplines. Across the board, the distinction between “learning on the job” and “learning off the job” is highly accepted and widespread; however, the rough differentiation of learning on or off the job has only limited analytical value. A number of studies are available on learning on the job. Eraut (2007) distinguishes three forms of learning on the job on an empirical basis. More precise classifications or models of learning on the job with reference to work are essential for practical and -conceptual development, in terms of justification as well as comparative evaluation of work-related learning.

Learning related to work can be subsumed under the collective term “work-related learning”; it refers to learning processes that relate to work and work processes in the broadest sense. The term is semantically broad and is often used synonymously with terms such as workplace learning, learning in and at work, workplace learning and decentralised learning. The most viable differentiation of work-based learning into the three models or variants of “work-based learning”, “work-linked learning” and “work-oriented learning”, carried out in the 1990s as part of the pilot research of the Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training (BIBB), has proved to be the most effective, whereby the fundamental distinguishing feature is the learning location and learning organisation-related criterion of the relationship between the place of work and the place of learning (Dehnbostel & Schröder 2017, 4 ff.):

• In work-integrated learning, the place of learning and the place of work are identical, learning takes place at the workplace or in the work process. Examples are: online communities in the workplace; traditional side-by-side apprenticeships; adaptive qualification in continuing vocational training; workplace learning, increasingly adopted from Anglo-Saxon.
• In work-connected learning, the place of learning and the real workplace are separate, but there is a direct spatial and organisational connection between the two, e.g. in quality circles, in the learning workshop and more recently in the context of learning factories and learning labs set up in digital working environments.
• In work-oriented learning, there is no direct connection between the place of learning to the place of work. In institutionalised learning places, however, subject content-oriented references to work are included in the curriculum. As special institutions in the education system, training firms, learning offices and production schools are also oriented in a holistic way to work content and environments. In addition, the simulation of work outside of work takes place in reality-oriented models at different locations.

The differentiation into three models of work-related learning has proven its worth. Nevertheless, the diversity of work-related qualification concepts and forms of learning organisation is not sufficiently differentiated. On a more developed level of differentiation, taking into account additional learning conceptual and organisational criteria, five basic forms of work-related learning can be distinguished to which different qualification concepts and learning organisation forms can be assigned. As the following table shows, individual concepts and forms can be assigned to several basic forms.

Table 2: Basic forms of work-related learning (Dehnbostel & Schröder 2017, p.4)

The spectrum of different basic forms of work-related learning will certainly remain in the future; digitalisation in particular speaks for its further pluralisation, as well as for associated concepts of qualification and learning organisation forms.

4        Work design conducive to learning and competence-development

Workplace design optimisation has been identified as a specific task through the awareness that work is to be distinguished spatially, temporally and organisationally from the living world. Work design measures and methods have existed for centuries, even if they were not perceived or designated as such.

Designing work in a way that is conducive to learning and competence development is both an opportunity and a necessity for companies: a necessity insofar as the digital transformation of the world of work demands learning at work and thus working environments that are conducive to learning; an opportunity because it can enable or improve innovations and developments in the sense of a learning company and in the interest of the employees.

For employees and companies alike, work design that promotes learning and competence offers advantageous opportunities for development. For the individual, work and employability as well as professional development and career paths depend essentially, and in many cases decisively, on the opportunity to learn in and at work and to expand one’s own professional competence. This requires a design of work that promotes learning and competence, linked to organised training and further education measures.

For companies, the digitalisation of the world of work, continuous improvement and innovation pro-cesses, learning and knowledge-based work tasks and work-related human resources development require work to be designed in such a way that promotes learning and skills. Such work design leads to increased efficiency and effectiveness in work processes and has thus become an economic factor for competitiveness in national and international markets. In this respect, the creation of working conditions conducive to learning and competence is already essential for operational-economic reasons.

Finally, work-based learning and its design are fundamental to lifelong learning in the digital world of work and life. By designing work in a way that promotes learning and skills and integrating it into a company’s learning concepts, as described in section 5, education and employment systems grow more strongly aligned. Individual, company and societal interests thus come into direct contact and complement each other. Work design that promotes learning and competence has a personal and societal dimension that goes beyond the world of work.

Concepts and criteria for work design that promotes learning and competence have been developed and applied since the 1980s (Dehnbostel 2008b; Schröder & Dehnbostel 2020). At the current state of the discussion and scientific knowledge, there are seven criteria underpinning work design that is conducive to learning and competence development. They can be summarised in table form as follows:

Table 3: Criteria of a work design conducive to learning

The criteria serve both the analysis and the construction of work design that promotes learning and competence. Practical and design-related application depends essentially on the extent to which they are compatible with company-related circumstances such as sector affiliation, company size, work and organisational concepts and company culture. They cannot be regarded as quality criteria per se, because whether they promote or hinder learning depends largely on individual characteristics such as the developmental stage, attitudes and the learning background of the individual. For example, a large scope of action may be conducive to learning for one person, but inhibit learning for another. The question of whether work is conducive to learning and competence is therefore not only subject to objective criteria such as learning potential and learning opportunities, but must also always be seen in relation to the individual subject.

5        In-company learning concepts

Learning concepts in the workplace have increasingly gained importance with restructured organisational concepts and the digital transformation of work. The underlying theoretical approaches, as shown below, have their origin in learning theory approaches of action- or project-oriented organized environments of teaching and learning, but in the company context they are given a work-related outset through their combination with company methods, basic forms of work-related learning or personnel development measures. They are situated in a work context that is determined by work organisation, technology, qualification and social factors and differ in their specific learning-aims. Whereas conventional learning in training workshops, courses and in further training for adaptation mainly followed the dominant teaching perspective of instruction, today’s approach-centres on user- and subject-related learning theory, with informal learning very much part of the process.

Following on from and updating the learning concepts presented by Dehnbostel & Schröder (2017, 8 ff.), the most important current learning concepts in work are e-learning (1), situated learning (2), organisational learning (3), experiential learning (4), self-directed learning (5) and reflective learning (6). In terms of learning theory and didactics, they focus on constructivism, action orientation and holism. Informal learning in particular plays a key role in learning theory.

 (1)      E-Learning

By definition, e-learning refers to all forms of learning and teaching in which electronic or digital media are used in the application of learning materials or serve interpersonal interaction. In short, e-learning is learning and teaching with electronic or digital media in formal or non-formal contexts. In addition to organised e-learning, informal learning in the course of work in digital work environments can also be counted as e-learning in the broadest sense. Organised e-learning is carried out in various forms, from web-based training (WBT) to blended learning to mobile learning. In terms of teaching and learning methods, e-teaching, e-tutoring and e-coaching have been introduced with e-learning.

(2)       Situated learning

The concept of situated learning is based on individual and collaborative learning processes that emerge through interactions in the social context of a community of practice (CoP) (Lave & Wenger, 1991). Situated learning takes place in the constant action and activity of a social group with its specific goals, competences, structures and rules. The process of growing into the group, becoming a full member and continuing to belong to the group includes not only the acquisition of competences mastered by the group, but also habits, attitudes, values and cultural practices. Situated learning is a form of enculturation, of integration into the learning and working culture of a community. This takes place through informal learning and is sometimes combined with formal and non-formal learning.

(3)       Organisational learning

Organisational learning applies the concept of learning to the supra-individual level of the organisation and is defined differently from the perspective of different disciplines and scientific theoretical orientations. It is organisational learning that takes place in the interaction between the individual and the organisation and focusses on the ability of organisations to develop in a targeted way (Senge 1990). While individual learning aims at the acquisition of individual knowledge, skills and the development of competences and education, the purpose of organisational learning is the acquisition of collective knowledge, collective values and norms as well as collective development of competences and culture. It is informal but needs to be extended to include formal and non-formal learning in order to promote holistic human resource and organisational development.

(4)       Experience-based learning

Experience-based learning – also referred to as experiential learning – is learning that takes place through perceiving, feeling and purposefully reflecting on experiences. Intensive experiential learning takes place in work when actions are associated with problems, challenges and uncertainties, then reflected upon. Experiential learning follows Dewey’s process of experience in the sequence of action – experience – reflection and its uninterrupted continuation, taking into account previous processes of experience and knowledge (Dewey 2010). A learning process takes place through experience, which can be classified as informal learning. In real work processes, informal learning merges with organised learning, for example in online communities or learning islands.

(5)       Self-directed learning

Self-directed learning refers to independent, self-determined control of learning processes. Learners determine the goals and content of learning largely independently, as well as the methods and tools to implement learning processes. Classification of the respective learning situation is, however, predetermined in educational pathways or work processes. This is not the case in self-organised learning. Self-directed learning involves independent design of learning opportunities and learning paths within a given framework. While self-directed learning in organised learning places and spaces is part of formal and non-formal learning, it is largely informal in the process of work.

(6)       Reflective learning

Reflective learning is particularly suited to the changed learning and working conditions in modern work processes and the digital transformation of in-company training, as the systems thinking and problem-solving skills associated with digitalisation require reflection. Reflective learning is learning that takes place through understanding and consciously reflecting on experiences. It is thus complementary to experiential learning. According to Lash (1996, 203 f.), reflective learning in work involves two types of reflexivity: structural and self-reflexivity. While structural reflexivity aims to make people aware of rules, resources and work structures and to help shape them, self-reflexivity aims to get people reflect on them-selves.

These learning concepts may not be clearly distinguishable from each other, but are complementary to varying degrees. In some cases they may overlap. Selection and application within the framework of qualification concepts and measures is usually carried out with direct reference to work requirements and the working environment as well as to criteria directly related to the place of learning.

6        Outlook: Key role of in-company training staff

In the international discussion on WBL, the key to high-quality qualification at the workplace is seen in company training personnel (UNESCO-UNEVOC, 185). In-company training personnel is a widely differentiated group of people that includes trainers, continuing education instructors, coaches, personnel developers, learning process facilitators, lecturers, teachers, coaches, mentors and training managers. Despite the relevance for WBL, an international comparative study on the functions and profiles of in-company training personnel remains a research desideratum.

For the day-to-day support of learning and competence development in the workplace, primarily so-called training and continuing education professionals are involved. These are skilled workers who accompany and support trainees and employees in their work without a formal qualification in vocational and further training. They acquire work and vocational pedagogical competences for this in informal or non-formal ways. For vocational training alone, the estimated number of skilled workers providing training in Germany is around five million, and the number of skilled workers providing further training is likely to exceed this figure considerably.

With the digitalisation of work, in-company training personnel are confronted with fundamentally changed tasks that result from the upheavals of digital transformation and thereby expand and enlarge their area of responsibility in vocational and further training as well as personnel development. Learning at work takes on the opposite meaning to industrial-Taylorist work processes in that it is no longer excluded in digital work but constitutively included. This repositions in-company training personnel with a focus on supporting, promoting, accompanying and assessing qualification processes in and at work.

Unlike school education staff (TVET teachers) in VET (Busian/Schröder 2015), there is no tradition-al or professionalised vocational qualification for company education staff. However, the need for this has been clearly recognised by the stakeholders involved in VET since the 1970s/1980s against the background of new work, organisational concepts and the onset of digitalisation. The measures taken have led to a three-tier formal qualification system in Germany.

This three-level formal qualification system for non-school-based VET staff consists of the “Trainer Aptitude Ordinance (AEVO)” from 1972, which has been amended twice, and two further training occupations: “Certified Initial and Continuing Training Educator” (2009) and “Certified Vocational Educator” (2009), which are assigned to levels 6 and 7 of the German Qualifications Framework (DQR) and the European Qualifications Framework (EQF) respectively. Below the level of the AE-VO, there is the level of training and further training specialists in companies themselves. This adds up to a four-tier qualification model in the companies, presented in the following overview.

Figure 1: Career pathways and qualification model of non-school-based TVET staff

sldkmfsk

dekofm

For in-company training personnel, this offers opportunities for professional development and promotion that begin at the skilled worker level with additional scope for informally or non-formally acquired training competences (initial and ongoing), leading to BA and MA degrees via the AEVO. This four-level model is currently being implemented; it has had little traction at upper level in companies so far. Moreover, qualification and needs analyses show that it needs to be expanded above the AEVO level and below the level of Certified Initial and Continuing Training Educator, especially at DQR/EQR level 5. Nevertheless, with the four-level in-company qualification system, there is a fundamental and indispensable basis for further professionalisation and vocationalisation of in-company and vocational training personnel.

References

Busian, A. & Schröder, T. (2015). Vocational Teacher Education at Technical University of Dortmund/Germany – recommendations for interoperability of regional standards and local operation in the ASEAN-region. In: TVET@Asia, issue 5, 1-16. Online: http://www.tvet-online.asia/issue5/busian_schroeder_tvet5.pdf (retrieved 28.10.2015).

Dehnbostel, P. (2008a). Learning in Work Processes – Competence Development. In: Rauner, F. & Maclean, R. (eds.): Handbook of Technical and Vocational Education and Training Research. Springer, 444-453.

Dehnbostel, P. (2008b). Shaping learning environments. In: F. Rauner, F. & Maclean, R. (eds.). Handbook of Technical and Vocational Education and Training Research. Berlin: Springer, 531–536.

Dehnbostel, P. (2010). Betriebliche Bildungsarbeit. Kompetenzbasierte Aus- und Weiterbildung. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider

Dehnbostel P. & Schröder, T. (2017). Work-based and Work-related Learning-Models and Learning Concepts. In: TVET@ASIA, issue 9, 1-16. Online: http://www.tvet-online.asia/9/issues/issue9/dehnbostel-schroeder-tvet9.pdf (retrieved 30.11.2017).

Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston. D.C. Health and Company.

Eraut, M. (2007). Learning from other people in the workplace. In: Oxford Review of Education, 33 (4), 403-422.

Greinert, W.-D. (1994). The “German System” of Vocational Training. History, Organization, Prospects. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

Hoftijzer, M., Stronkowski, P., & Rozenbaum, J. (2018). Getting Out of School and into the Workplace Strengthening Work-Based Learning in Upper Secondary Technical Education in Poland’s Świętokrzyskie Region. Online: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/29923/9781464813221.pdf (retrieved 23.08.2021).

IAG-TVET. (2017). Investing in work based learning. Online: https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/—ed_emp/—ifp_skills/documents/publication/wcms_565923.pdf (retrieved 23.08.2021).

ILO. (2017a). World employment and social outlook 2017. Online: http://www.ilo.org/global/research/globalreports/weso/sustainable-enterprises-and-jobs-2017/lang%2D%2Den/index.htm (retrieved 07.05.2018).

ILO. (2017b). ILO toolkit for quality apprenticeships – Vol. 1: Guide for policy makers. Online: http://www.ilo.org/skills/pubs/WCMS_607466/lang%2D%2Den/index.htm (retrieved 07.05.2018).

ILO & World Bank. (2013). Towards a Model Apprenticeship Framework: A Comparative Analysis of National Apprenticeship Systems, International Labour Organisation and the World Bank, New Delhi.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning. Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lash, Sc. (1996). Reflexivität und ihre Doppelungen: Struktur, Ästhetik und Gemeinschaft. In: Beck, U., Giddens, A. & Lash, Sc. (Ed.). Reflexive Modernisierung. Eine Kontroverse. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 195-286.

NA at BIBB. (National Agency ‘Education for Europe’ at the Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training) (2017). Work-based-Learning in der Berufsausbildung. https://www.na-bibb.de/service/publikationen/publikationsdetails/wk/anzeigen/artikel/work-based-learning-in-der-berufsbildung/ (retrieved 13.07.2021).

Schröder, T. (2020). Berufsbildung aus der Sicht internationaler Organisationen. In: Arnold, R., et al. (eds.): Handbuch Berufsbildung. Online: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-19312-6_56 (retrieved 23.08.2021).

Schröder, T. & Dehnbostel, P. (2019). Enhancing Permeability Between Vocational and Tertiary Education Through Corporate Learning. In: McGrath, S., Mulder, M., Papier, J., & Suart, R. (eds.): Handbook of Vocational Education and Training. Cham: Springer, 1 – 24.

Schröder, T. & Dehnbostel, P. (2020). Unbound Learning Venues and Work Design Conducive to Learning in the Digitalized World of Work. In: Peters, M.A., Heraud, R. (eds.): Encyclopedia of Educational Innovation. Singapore: Springer, 1 – 6.

Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline. The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday Currency.

Stratmann, K.-W. (1993). Die gewerbliche Lehrlingserziehung in Deutschland. Modernisierungsgeschichte der betrieblichen Berufsausbildung. Bd. 1: Berufserziehung in der ständischen Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: G.A.F.B.

Sweet, R. (2014). Work-based learning: A handbook for policy makers and social partners in ETF partner countries. Online: https://www.etf.europa.eu/sites/default/files/m/8EFD210012D6B04EC1257CE60042AB7E_Work-based%20learning_Handbook.pdf (retrieved 23.08.2021).

UNESCO. (2016). Strategy for Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) (2016–2021). Paris. Online: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000245239 (retrieved 10.05.2018).

UNESCO-UNEVOC. (2013). Revisiting Global Trends in TVET. Chapter 5: Work-based learning: Why? How? (Sweet, R.), 2013. Online: http://bit.ly/2q4jPs3 (retrieved 23.08.2021).

In Germany work-based learning – which goes by the long-established title: “Learning in the Process of Work”, has been gaining in importance since the 1970s. The term learning here is considered the ideal for the comprehensive development that delivers professional competence. The digitalization of work actually reinforces a renaissance of learning in and through work. This is mirrored in new business and work concepts, such as the learning company and industry 4.0. Although in practice many varieties and models of work-related learning have been developed, the related research is still in its infancy. The variants are differentiated according to the place of learning in work-integrated, work-connected, and work-oriented learning. Of this typology, five models stand out in terms of the learning organization and didactic-methodological criteria. All relevant forms and concepts of work-related learning can be assigned to these models, from communities of practice through coaching to work-oriented learning at schools and universities. The theory of learning and didactic implementation takes place in learning concepts, which focus on action learning and the learner’s self-regulation. These include concepts such as situated learning, self-directed learning and reflexive learning. Recognition and accreditation of learning outcome and success is a primary task: While experience-based learning phases in formally organized educational programs at schools and in universities are per se accredited, experience-based learning in the workplace for employees is recognized only in exceptional cases and accredited to formal educational programs in the vocational and academic educational sector.

Keywords: Work-based learning, work-related learning, work-oriented learning, learning concepts, experiential learning, work-connected learning, work-integrated learning

1 Understanding and theoretical references

The terms work-based and work-related learning, refer to learning in enterprises, training centers, schools and academia. This includes direct learning at work and learning within work processes and through work. The main focus of this mode of learning is on the workplace and the work processes with their learning potentials and learning opportunities that must be analyzed and methodically developed. Therefore, in this section, we discuss the historical development of learning at work, followed by a discussion of the status quo of research on work-based learning in Germany. The general understanding of the concept of work-based learning is in line with the definition of the Interagency Group on Technical and Vocational Education (IAG-TVET, convened by UNESCO in 2008 “to ensure a good coordination of activities by the key international organisations involved in the delivery of policy advice, programmes and research on TVET” (IAG-TVET 2015)) whereas “Work-based learning refers to all forms of learning that takes place in a real work environment. It provides individuals with the skills needed to successfully obtain and keep jobs and progress in their professional development. Apprenticeships, internships/traineeships and on-the-job training are the most common types of work-based learning. These types usually – but not always – combine elements of learning in the workplace with classroom-based learning.”

1.1 Historic origin and classification

Learning in work is the oldest and most widespread form of professional qualification. It is a learning that incorporates idealistically cognitive, affective, and psychomotor dimensions equally. The place of work is simultaneously a place of learning. Experiences, motivation and social references are particularly addressed through the serious character of real work. The conditions and orientations of learning at work are highly dependent on historical, cultural and branch-specific circumstances. In Europe, the fields of craftsmanship and traditional teaching, business and job-specific work have been learned largely by imitation and on-the-spot imitation (Pätzold 2017). This is the case even today regarding the adaptation qualification and the rather unconscious learning in the work, which is the informal learning in sense of informal competence development. Learning is done in the workplace by watching, imitating, participating, helping and trying or simulating the observed person. The learning outcome essentially depends on supporting trained laborers or specialists at the workplace, on the work tasks, and the disposition and motivation of the learners.

From a pedagogic and educational perspective, learning at the workplace is first comes to light in the development of education in the eighteenth century and then systematically in the development of the industrial age (Stratmann & Schlösser 1990, Greinert 1999). In the context of learning in the area of craftsmanship, learning at the workplace is now seen under methodological aspects. Training workshops in industry and the start of the dual system are milestones in development. The 3rd Industrial Revolution – of information and communication technologies beginning in the 1970s – has meant that learning at the workplace has undergone fundamental change encompassing objectives, content, forms and methods of learning. New work and organizational concepts require self-directed, process-oriented and life-accompanying learning in the work, which contribute decisively to professional competence development (Streumer 2001, Frieling et al., 2007, Dehnbostel 2009).

“Learning in the Process of Work” (Lernen im Prozess der Arbeit) is mentioned early on in the German Democratic Republic both as a term and a concept (Zentralinstitut für Berufsbildung 1974). This specific kind of work-based learning already included school-based learning as “Teaching in the Context of Learning in the Process of Work” (ibid., 51 ff.). The intention was to implement the work place as a learning place in a structured manner and, in a centrally managed apprenticeship system of a nation-wide organized socialist production system, this was economically feasible.

Todays´ concepts of “learning in the process of work” are based on the change of work processes and work organization in industrial production (Senge 1990; Watkins & Marsick 1993) and the subsequent change of the laborers’ role and the image of man. It is emphasized that work has an extended, holistic and cohesive structure demanding new skills making work-based learning possible and necessary in a previously unknown way. This learning is today characterized by subject-orientation, self-regulation, process-orientation, experiential learning and the combination of informal, non-formal and formal learning in increasingly digitalized work processes (Dehnbostel 2015, 30 ff.). This kind of learning is clearly expressed in new business concepts such as the learning company and in the implementation of the guiding principle of vocational or professional action competence. It is widely termed a renaissance of learning at the workplace.

1.2 Research approaches to work-based learning and “Learning in the Process of Work”

Thus far, there are few contributions to learning at the workplace of German VET research (Dehnbostel 2008, 445 ff., Schröder 2014, 5 ff.). At the present time, however, the research related to this is intensified by a primary focus on competency development, the combination of informal experiential learning with forms of education and validation, and the digitalization of the working world. Learning in traditional craftsmanship and in guild-related vocational education and training is reflected in the research approach to learning in communities of practice and in online communities (Henschel 2001, Müller 2002). The concept of Communities of Practice has its origin in ethnographically oriented studies (Lave & Wenger 1991, Wenger & Snyder 2000). Based on the learning concept of situated learning it is learning through actions and everyday activities in a community of practically active people. Learning and competence development take place in a common social space for all group members and are based on common rules and regulations.

Online communities represent a current development of communities of practice. Informal learning follows the principles of work-based learning. Due to the growing digitalization of the working world, it is expected that this virtual variant of communities of practice will continue to grow in their relevance for work and thus for companies. They represent the social grouping of people who share common interests and often shared living and working situations. In contrast to conventional school learning and teaching theories, it is assumed in communities, whether real or virtual, that learned knowledge and skills cannot be regarded separately from its genesis and its surrounding situations, which is constitutive for competence development. These underlying principles of informal learning were successfully tested and employed in virtual developments in which virtual work processes and theoretical input were productively combined and learners acquired relevant competences (Schröder 2014, Schröder 2015).

Communities of practice and online communities are new forms of work-related learning organization as coaching, learning bays, work- and learning tasks, and quality circle. These forms of leaning are characterized by combining systematic learning and working at the in-company workplace. Research on learning at the workplace shows that these forms of learning contribute towards innovation of work processes (Molzberger et. al. 2008, Schröder 2009) and can be combined with systems of knowledge management (Schröder 2009a). Two further priority research areas, in which practical developments also advance the theory, are competency development and self-directed learning (Dehnbostel 2008, 446 ff.). For all three research subjects, experiential learning and reflexivity are the primary areas of analysis and knowledge. Already Dewey denoted reflexivity as a central category of thinking about experiences and individual development (1910/1951, 6).

In his basic approach to combine “experience and education”, reflexivity is theoretically and practically interlinked with experiential learning. The experience derives from a preceding action. This experience is to be reflected and leads to knowledge, when actions are not repetitive, but holistic, containing problems and uncertainties, which is the rule in changing working processes and environments (Dehnbostel 2008, Schröder 2009). At present, digitalized work environments, which are dynamically driven by industry 4.0, represent such work environments and a subsequent change of work processes (Spöttl & Windelband 2017, Gennrich 2017). The sequence of action – experience – reflection and its continuation, taking into account previous experiences and knowledge processes, is a learning theoretical “evolutionary progress” assuming that learners learn actively and self-determinedly. On the basis of self-activity and self-determination, reality is developed individually through learning and experiential processes.

Donald Schön deepened Dewey’s idea of learning from experience through reflexivity in his world-famous work “The reflective practitioner” (Schön 1983). According to Schön, reflexivity is a dialogue between thought and action, which enables the practitioner to cope with his complex tasks and its inherent problems. He distinguishes two modes of reflection for problem solving by professional action: the reflection in the action and the reflection on the action. The reflection in the action allows the practitioner to solve problems in which his tacit knowledge no longer helps him by reflection while the action is being performed. Reflection of this kind presupposes an awareness of one’s own knowledge, but the practitioner must not necessarily be able to articulate his knowledge in a verbalized form. The result is a situationally coordinated action (ibid.9).

The second mode of reflection, the reflection on the action, is an abandonment or disembarkation from the action flow for the purpose of reflection on an action already performed or actions still to be performed. The reflexive consideration is made by cognitively capturing, storing and analyzing the action. To this end, the knowledge of action is formulated explicitly, it can be analyzed and reorganized. Engraving action problems due to inadequacies or mistakes in action knowledge can be remedied by changing the knowledge. Thus, knowledge becomes communicable and at the same time open to discussion and criticism.

This research and development approach of reflexive learning in the work is pursued by Argyris and Schön (1974) with the concept of organizational learning, in which the reflexivity is applied to all employees and not only to professionals. Recent studies on reflexivity in work are strongly influenced by Scott Lash, who refers to his analysis of the theory of reflexive modernism, also called the second modernity (Lash et al., 1994). In Germany, the reflexivity is taken into strong consideration, especially regarding the concept of vocational action competence and the reflexive action competence (Dehnbostel 2015, 15 ff.; Dwi Fosa, Peinemann, & Schröder 2015).

2 Variants and models of work-based and work-related learning

As mentioned above, the term “work-related learning” is semantically broad and has many different meanings. Depending on its relation to in-company work, work-related learning can differ widely. Three variants of work-based and work-related learning can be distinguished from the criterion of the relationship between the place of learning and the place of work (Dehnbostel 2009, 2631 ff.):

−     work-integrated learning: Learning venue and workplace are identical; the actual learning takes place at the workplace or in the work process. Examples are Communities of Practices (CoP), work- and learning tasks, traditional apprenticeship and adaptation training

−     work-connected learning: Learning venue and workplace are separated, though spatially, and in terms of work organization, they are connected. In practice, e.g. there is learning area close to the production line, which focuses on education trainees relevant to a section of the production; the concept is dubbed the learning bay. Other examples are quality circles, learning stations, and internships

−     work-oriented learning: Work-oriented learning take place in formal learning venues such as vocational schools or colleges, training centres or universities. Learning is made up here of simulation of work organization, work tasks and processes. It sets out to simulate real work places as exactly as possible. As learning rather than work is the primary aim, the disparity of simulated and real work places cannot be compensated.

When discussing aspects of learning organization and didactic-methodological criteria, five types of work-based learning can be distinguished and attributed to different organizational concepts of learning and organizational forms of learning. Individual concepts or shapes can be assigned to several models if they are designed differently. They feature in the graphic here and are described in more detail below:

Figure 1:      Models of work-based and work-related learning (Dehnbostel 2007)

(1) Learning through active participation in real work processes

Learning through active participation in real work processes or “learning in the process of work” is the most common form of vocational education and training. It is a learning that idealistically incorporates cognitive, affective, and psychomotor dimensions equally. Experiences, motivation and social references are addressed in particular, through the actual seriousness of real work. In contrast to school and academic learning, the learning unfolds in real working and social situations. The conditions and orientations of learning at work are highly dependent on historical, cultural and branch-specific circumstances.

The concept of communities of practice (CoP) addressed in section 1.2 is a classical concept of learning through trade practices. In recent developments, the CoP and online communities as a virtual variant are accompanied in a targeted manner (Schröder 2017), so that they can also be assigned to the following model (2). Learning on the Job (Onstenk 1995) and various forms of adaptation training are further learning concepts for learning through active participation in the real work process.

(2) Learning through companionship and instruction at work place

In the company’s educational work, systematic instruction mainly takes place in the initial training of unskilled and skilled laborer. Still the most simple form of training is based on the principle of imitation. In the course of dual apprenticeship, however, teaching does not correspond to the principles of modern methods of self-directed and self-determined learning, but it still has an important place in the plurality of learning methods. Masters, journeyman, and trainee specialists play a key role in traditional forms of instruction. They select the work tasks, arrange the work and learning processes and evaluate the work results. The traditional instruction is often carried out according to the four-step method: preparing, showing, imitating and practicing (Greinert 1994). Companies increasingly employ this traditional practice in initial vocational training in advanced vocational training. However, these and similar learning methods at the workplace, such as analytical work instruction and the action-regulated instruction, contribute only to a limited extent to competence development and reflexive action competence as they are not holistic and self-controlled methods. Different forms of accompanied learning in the process of work, such as learning facilitation, coaching, and mentoring have resulted in new forms of accompanied learning have experienced a broad spread among companies in a short time (Dehnbostel 2015, 103 ff.). Also a part of this are accompanying communities of practice and online communities.

(3) Learning through the combination of informal and formal learning

Successful learning through the combination of informal and formal learning can be observed in new forms of learning organization such as learning bays, work and learning tasks and coaching. They have gained a great deal of importance in the field of in-company education, but are mainly practiced in large enterprises and, to a lesser extent, by medium-sized enterprises. For small businesses, work and learning tasks, learning and organization forms that combine formal and informal learning, have proven to be a success (Schröder 2009). Systematic learning processes in the immediate work process combined with informal and formal learning occur in the American “Structured Learning on the Job” approach (Jacobs 1999). In the 1980s, this structured learning process, rooted in traditional training methods, is supported by learning materials and equipment.

(4) Learning through in-company observation and exploration

In-company internships are assigned to work-connected learning. Work experiences, that occur in companies, are integrated into formal educational programs in schools, vocational schools, and universities. It organizational form differs as the example of Work Integrated Learnings (WIL) in university programs shows (Peach & Gamble 2011). The intention is for interns from schools to gain insight into the working world therefore acquiring real experience and a deeper understanding of theories. However, a targeted overview of areas not represented in one’s own company is often sought for apprentices or trainees in decentralized inter-company programs. Under the auspices of formal inter-company associations and networks, systematic explorations and forms of job rotation are employed, which serve the acquisition of job-related or job-specific competences. Inter-company exploration is carried out when benchmarking is used as a form of learning organization. The comparison of methods, services and organizational processes plays a special role. These approaches and concepts are organized, formal learning measures, explicitly employing informal learning through experiences but not formalizing them.

(5) Learning through simulating work organization, work tasks, and processes in an institutional setting

Work-oriented learning in simulated workplaces and work processes takes place in schools, colleges, as well as in in-company, supra-company and non-company training and education centers. Well-known concepts and learning forms are production schools, training courses, training companies and task-based work in educational centers. Dual apprenticeship learners learn theory in vocational colleges in a task-based manner. The underlying curricula are based on so-called learning fields which reflect areas of the specific occupation. The well-known instructional psychology of “cognitive apprenticeship” also belongs to this model (Collins et al. 1989). This approach focuses on the transfer of basic elements of traditional trade apprenticeship to the acquisition of primarily cognitively determined competencies. While simulations do not allow for authentic learning, learning can be influenced to a great extent by realistic, work-related, spatial and economic criteria. Simulation of work processes sets out to create a learning situation that is as realistic as possible, to enable acquisition of complex competences and experiences and to have them reflected upon. Simulations in education and training are gaining in importance rather than losing despite the increase in learning at work is not a paradox, however, it is due mainly to the growing complexity of many work and service processes, and in particular to the observed growth potentials of simulated learning through digital media (Landriscina 2015).

The range of different models of work-based and work-related learning and the forms of learning organization associated with them will certainly continue, expand, and be differentiated in the future. To what extent learning in the workplace supplements or replaces conventionally organized learning outside of the workplace cannot be effectively estimated by today’s stage of development and research. Nonetheless, it may be assumed that the acquisition of comprehensive, professional competence in vocational and academic education is only possible through the implementation of different models of work-related learning. Theoretically, didactically, methodologically and in terms of its learning-organization these models relate to each other in a reciprocal and complementary manner.

3 Learning concepts of work-based and work-related learning

The learning concepts for learning in and at work as well as for learning via work all aim at action-orientation and self-direction of the learner. They are shaped very differently when implementing methodic and didactic approaches. In work-integrated forms of learning such as learning on the job and communities of practice, a primarily informal learning takes place in the absence of didactically structured learning organization. Work-connected and work-oriented models are essentially related to formal learning and are intentionally structured by didactic-methodological methods. In the model mentioned in (3), informal and formal learning are combined, and the concepts and forms assigned to the model are didactically and methodically structured. Informal learning is very differently employed in these learning concepts. It is a learning through one’s own experiences and acquired in the operational context in and about work practices.

It results from work and action requirements and is not organized and accompanied by pedagogy, it is performed in an unintended manner. Informal learning ranges from conscious working and learning process through sensual and physical sensation to cognitively unconscious learning processes. According to relevant empirical studies, 60-80 per cent of an expert worker´s knowledge is based on informal learning (Dehnbostel et al., 2005). The extent to which informal learning is constitutive in work-based learning concepts depends on the extent to which learning is directly addressed in the work organization. Three important learning approaches are presented below (Dehnbostel 2015, 43 ff.).

3.1 Situated Learning

Situated Learning aims at action-learning in real work and life situations (Lave & Wenger 1991, Lave 1993). The situation and the social context characterize situated learning, which at the same time means that this learning is not functionally reduced, but is a form of acculturation, of growing into the learning and working culture. In contrast to relevant cognitivist learning concepts, the learning process is embedded in the respective conditions of original and surrounding situations, and cannot be separated from them. Not only knowledge and skills are passed on through this learning, but habits, attitudes and values. In a broad understanding, the concept of situated learning is the realization of a theory of social learning.

Situated learning is a process of continuous enculturation into a social group with its specific objectives, competences, internal structures and rules. The process of acculturation, becoming a full-fledged member, involves not only the acquisition of the relevant competencies dominated by the group, but also the acquisition of typical cultural practices and the formation of a group identity. As the following illustration illustrates, four reference categories are fundamental to this process.

(1)       Practice-Orientation

Learning is practice-oriented. The learning process takes place through active action and practical experience in and with the community.

(2)       Group functions as a community of practice

The group as a social community, whose individual and collective actions are directed toward a common goal, provides the framework for group learning and shapes the learning of the individual.

(3)       Formation of Identity

The often protracted development towards an expert is accompanied by the formation of identity as a member of the respective in many social communities and group.

(4)       Meaning and importance of learning

Newly acquired or generated knowledge and competencies are brought into harmony with one’s own experiences and those of the other group members, while the learning process is taking place. The acquisition of knowledge and competency is meaningful, as learning takes place in an authentic practice context with transparent and clear objectives, not in a simulated situation, artificially designed solely for learning.

The concept of situational learning is based on the social context of a community of practice, a meaningful and sustainable practice, as well as the relevance of one’s own actions. The affiliation to a group is socially and individually integrating and supportive. Learning and competence development take place in a common social space and embraces all members of the group.

This is especially the case for learning at the workplace: learning is done interactively with binding reference to work tasks and the respective subtasks of organization, planning and disposition. Attitudes and values are acquired in the group and within the work organization through socialization and mutual learning processes. Such an understanding of learning requires a different picture of learning than institutionalized formal learning. It is an experiential and informal learning that through integration into the social group and participation in their intentional actions eventually leads to learning outcomes and competences.

3.2 Self-directed Learning

Self-directed learning is the independent and self-determined control of learning processes. The learners determine the objectives and contents of the learning process in a certain framework, as well as the methods and tools for the regulation of learning, largely independently. However, the scope of the action or the superordinate structural classification of the relevant learning situation in work processes is predetermined under fixed criteria. With regard to the framework and the environment, self-directed learning is not autonomous learning, but goal-oriented selection and determination of learning possibilities and learning paths.

This also addresses the crucial difference between self-directed and self-organized learning. In the case of self-organized learning, the institutional and organizational framework of learning is determined by the learner and is not determined from outside, as in self-directed learning. However, learning in work processes usually takes place in working situations, which are not specifically designed for learning. They are determined, however, by their objectives and higher organizational structures. At the same time, they enable independent and self-directed learning within the given framework, particularly reflexive learning based on experiences. Self-directed can refer to both an individual and a group.

Independent of learning theorems, the individual´s self-direction is a prerequisite for participatory and networked working forms in restructured work organizations. The design of newly acquired handling and disposition margins, the implementation of continuous improvement processes, the application of integrated quality assurance procedures as well as the fulfillment of target agreements are increasingly self-directed. Such self-directed processes are the consequence of decentralization and de-hierarchization in new work organizations. They are characteristic of modern work processes and at the same time inseparable from informal learning processes.

In this respect, the individual’s self-direction in the work process and the resultant learning undoubtedly subordinate purposes and criteria, based on economic intentions, competitiveness and the corresponding forms of organization and qualification. Self-direction has become an important business factor in modern companies. From the individual´s perspective, there are self-directed action and learning orientations instead of instructional and hierarchical thinking, behavioral and orientation patterns. Processes and developments are made possible which take up real experiences and subjective interests more strongly and which correspond to a differentiation of educational paths and life patterns. To what extent these developments in the work can actually take place and be self-controlled does not exert itself primarily in an increased responsibility and the burden lies on the respective working conditions and working culture.

3.3 Reflexive Learning

Reflexive learning, as well as self-directed learning, embraces the changing learning and working conditions in modern work processes and the renaissance of learning at work. It is based on real work and action situations, and their consideration in work-related learning concepts has a historical forerunner, which focus on experience. In connection with constructivist learning approaches, it is crucial to view research based on the concepts of the reflexivity and experience by John Dewey and the “reflective practitioner” by Donald Schön (Dewey 1910/1951, Schön 1983).

Reflexive learning is a form of learning through understanding and conscious reflection of experiences. The underlying experiences are the result of sensory, emotional, social and cognitive perceptions. Intensive reflexive learning takes place in the work when the work processes are enriched by problems, challenges and uncertainties for the worker. The problems and its solutions are being reflected upon, which leads to the generation of knowledge. Lash (Lash et al., 1994) establishes a dual reflexivity: structural reflexivity and self-reflexivity.

Structural reflexivity aims to raise awareness of the rules and resources and the structures and social conditions of existence of the actors themselves. In self-reflexivity self-determination takes the place of the former heteronomous determination of the actors i.e. acting worker. Self-reflexivity, therefore, describes the capability of self-perception and the reflection of the actors over themselves. This ability to reflect and thus to detach from the surrounding structures is determined by the biography and the steps of formation and development contained in it, but influences this in turn in a retroactive process.

Self-determination and personality formation are inseparably connected with the ability to self-reflect and the recognition of social-enterprise processes. In actual work, reflexivity means, therefore, to reflect on work structures as well as about oneself, and connect with the preparation, execution and evaluation of work tasks. The tabular overview summarizes the dual reflexivity.

Figure 3: Dual Reflexivity (Dehnbostel 2007)

In modern work processes, experiences are no longer made in the same way as in conventional work. The sensory feedback of work on the subject is changed, partly by the use of information and communication technologies. Above all, work experiences, which are mainly perceived through seeing, hearing and feeling are considerably limited of their things and services through automation, the employment of handling devices, diagnostic systems and the internet.

The digitalization of the working world continues at a rapid pace, which is emphasized through the concept of Industry 4.0. Reflexive learning does not refer to the reflexive processing of sensory experiences, but to an extension of the external experiences beyond the conventional sense through mental, cognitive, emotional and interactive digital processes. The digital working world connects the physical to the virtual working world and requires reflexive learning, especially in this phase of technological transition. The reflexive processing of increasingly digitalized experiences and thus reflexive learning itself seem equally relevant for all variants and models of work-related and work-based learning.

4    Outlook: Accreditation of prior Learning Experiences and Validation of Informal Learning

Work-related and work-based learning, which is informal learning in the workplace, is acknowledged in the field of company personnel development, but accreditation to professional or academic education courses have thus far only been given in exceptional cases. This is contrary to work-based learning phases conducted by schools and universities, whether through an internship or in a dual course of studies, it is considered as part of the respective educational program.

A wide range of systems and procedures have been developed at the European level to validate the competencies acquired through learning at work (CEDEFOP 2015). A sufficient and also scientifically recognized and proven systematization of the competence assessment and validation methods developed so far in theory and practice has not yet been available. The polar criteria of work requirement and educational development are suitable as helpful categories for such a systematization. Following that, procedures in which the individual and his personality development are given priority are distinguished from procedures that analyze competencies from the perspective of work requirement. The classification between economically determined work and the qualifications derived from it on the one hand and the subject-based competency development on the other, form the basis for the assessment of competence analysis methods in the spectrum of different interests. In any case, “Learning the Process of Work” plays a central role in the development of the individual’s competence. Through their validation and accreditation, they are linked to the overall education system. The employment and education system will be more permeable through an enhanced integration of vocational and academic education.

References

Argyris, C. & Schön, D. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

CEDEFOP (2015). European guidelines for validating non-formal and informal learning. Luxembourg: Publication Office.

Collins, A., Brown, J., Seely, J., & Newmann, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing and mathematics. In: Resnick, L. (ed.): Knowing, learning and instruction. Hillsdale, 453-494.

Dehnbostel, P. (2007). Lernen im Prozess der Arbeit. Waxmann Verlag. Münster. Studienreihe Bildungs- und Wissenschaftsmanagement. Band 7.

Dehnbostel, P. (2008). Learning in Work Processes – Competence Development. In Rauner, F. & Maclean, R. (eds.): Handbook of Technical and Vocational Education and Training Research. Berlin: Springer, 444-453.

Dehnbostel, P. (2009). New Learning Strategies and Learning Cultures in Companies. In: Maclean, R. & Wilson, D.N. (eds.): International Handbook of Education for the Changing World of Work. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2629-2647.

Dehnbostel, P. (2015). Betriebliche Bildungsarbeit. Kompetenzbasierte Aus- und Weiterbildung im Betrieb. 2. Auflage, Baltmannsweiler: Schneider.

Dehnbostel, P., Molzberger, G., & Overwien, B. (2005). New Forms of Learning and Work Organization in the IT Industry: A German Perspective on Informal Learning. In: Bascia, N. et al. (eds.): International Handbook of Educational Policy. Dordrecht: Springer, 1043-1064.

Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston. D.C. Health and Company.

Dewey, J. (1951). Wie wir denken. Zürich.

Dwi Fosa, N., Peinemann, K., & Schröder, T. (2015). Moving beyond talk-and-chalk-teaching – a holistic didactical approach to teacher training through trilateral cooperation between Germany, Indonesia and Myanmar. IN: TVET@Asia Issue 5. Online: http://www.tvet-online.asia/issue/5/dwi-fosa-etal

Frieling E., Schäfer, E., & Fölsch, Th. (2007). Konzepte zur Kompetenzentwicklung und zum Lernen im Prozess der Arbeit. Münster: Waxmann.

Gennrich, R. B. (2017). Moving Across the Middle Income Trap (MIT) Border through Human Capacity Building. Thailand 4.0 – Industry 4.0 Emerging Challenges for Vocational Education and Training. In: TVET@Asia Issue 8. Online: http://www.tvet-online.asia/issue/8/gennrich

Greinert, W.-D. (1994). The „German System“ of Vocational Training. History, Organization, Prospects. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

Greinert, W.-D. (1999). Berufsqualifizierung und dritte Industrielle Revolution. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

Henschel, A. (2001). Communities of Practice. Plattform für organisationales Lernen und den Wissenstransfer. Wiesbaden: Gabler.

IAG-TVET (2015). Investing in Work Based Learning. Interagency Group on Technical and Vocational Education and Training.

Jacobs, R. (1999). Structured On-the-Job Training in the U.S. In: Dehnbostel, P. et al. (eds.): Erfahrungslernen in der Berufsbildung – Beiträge zu einem kontroversen Konzept. Neusäß, 281-294.

Landriscina, F. (2015). Simulation and Learning. Berlin: Springer Verlag.

Lash, Sc., Giddens, A., & Beck, U. (1994). Reflexive Modernization. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Lave, J. (1993). Situated learning in communities of practice. In: Resnick, L./Levine, J. M. & Teasley, St. D. (edt.): Perspectives on socially shared cognition. Washington DC, 63-82.

Lave, J. & Wenger E. (1991). Situating learning. Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge/UK.

Müller, Chr. (2002). Online Communities im Internet. In: Sozialwissenschaften und Berufspraxis, 25, 4, 353-364. Online: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-37917 (retrieved 30.6.2015).

Molzberger, G., Harder, D., Dehnbostel, P., & Schröder, T. (2008). Weiterbildung in den betrieblichen Arbeitsprozess integrieren. Erfahrungen und Erkenntnisse in kleinen und mittelständischen IT-Unternehmen. Waxmann Verlag. Münster.

Onstenk, J. (1995). Human Resources Development and On-the-job Learning. In: Mulder, M., Nijhof, W.J. & Brinkerhoff, R. O. (eds.): Corporate Training for Effective Performance. New York: Springer Science + Business,135-156.

Pätzold, G. (2017). Betriebliches Bildungspersonal. Stärkung seines professionellen pädagogischen Handelns. Diskussion Berufsbildung. Band 13. Schneider Verlag Hohengehren. Baltmannsweiler.

Peach, D. & Gamble, N. (2011). Scoping Work-Integrated Learning Purposes, Practices and Issues. In: Billet, St. & Henderson, A. (eds.): Developing Learning Professionals. Integrating Experiences in University and Practice Settings. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 169-186.

Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How Professionals Think In Action. New York: Basic books.

Schröder, T. (2009). Arbeits- und Lernaufgaben für die Weiterbildung. Eine Lernform für das Lernen im Prozess der Arbeit. Bielefeld: Bertelsmann.

Schröder, T. (2009a). Die Bedeutung von Arbeits- und Lernaufgaben für die Wissensgenerierung. In: PADUA- Fachzeitschrift für Pflegepädagogik. Heft 05/2009. S. 23-26.

Schröder, T. (2015). Quality enhancement and assurance in research work via scientific coaching: a theoretical basis for inter-institutional and cross-regional research activities in East and Southeast Asia. In: TVET@Asia, issue 4, 1-18. Online: http://www.tvet-online.asia/issue4/schroeder_tvet4.pdf (retrieved 30.01.2015).

Schröder. T. (2017). Work-Based Learning in a Virtual Work Environment – the Future of Learning? In: TVET@Asia, issue 9, 1-12. Online: http://www.tvet-online.asia/issue9/schroeder _tvet9.pdf (retrieved 30.07.2017).

Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline. The art and practice of the learning organization. Doubleday Currency. New York.

Spöttl, G. & Windelband, L. (2017). Industrie 4.0. Chancen und Risiken für die Berufsbildung. Reihe Berufsbildung, Arbeit und Innovation. Bertelsmann Verlag. Bielefeld.

Stratmann, K. & Schlösser, M. (1990). Das Duale System der Berufsbildung. Frankfurt a. M.: G.A.F.B.

Streumer, Jan N. (ed.) 2001. Perspectives on Learning at the Workplace: Theoretical Positions, Organizational Factors, Learning Processes and Effects. Enschede: University of Twente.

Watkins, K.-E & Marsick, V.J. (1993). Sculpting the learning organization: Lessons in the art and science of systemic change. Jossey-Bass. San Francisco.

Wenger, E. & Snyder, W.M. (2000). Communities of Practice: The Organizational Frontier. In: Harvard Business Review, 1, 22-25.

Zentralinstitut für Berufsbildung der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik (1974). Lernen im Prozeß der Arbeit. Berlin: Volk und Wissen.