Organisatoriske særtrekk i samordningen mellom skole og arbeidsliv i yrkesfagutdanningen: Empirisk belysning gjennom en norsk casestudie: [Organisational characteristics in the coordination between school and working life in vocational training: Empirical illumination through a Norwegian case study]

Merete Chatrin Rekdahl; Jan Merok Paulsen

doi:10.3384/njvet.2242-458X.2313154

Authors

Merete Chatrin Rekdahl OsloMet, Norway https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8880-5564
Jan Merok Paulsen OsloMet, Norway https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9903-5750

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3384/njvet.2242-458X.2313154

Keywords:

Organizational characteristics, collaborative learning, didactical core practices, sensemaking, organizational routine

Abstract

The current study provides an in-depth investigation of critical factors of successful inter- organisational collaboration involving upper secondary schools, vocational communities situated at department levels, and labour market partners in the school’s local environment. The research question that has guided the study is: What are the organisational characteristics of schools and subject departments which are well-performing in terms of a high degree of student completion in vocational education and training? The concept of ‘organisational characteristic’ refers to structures, roles and institutionalised patterns of collaboration involving school teachers, school leaders and labour market partners. The study is designed as a single case study encompassing two units of analysis, embracing school and department levels in their interactions with partners in the labour market. The findings of the study highlight the importance of collaborative learning through the creation and development of specific organisational routines directed towards the core practices of vocational didactics. Moreover, the findings underscore the process of local adaptation activated at the subject- department level and directed towards corresponding businesses and relevant parts of the public sector. Implications for further research and practice are discussed.

References

Akkerman, S. F. & Bakker, A. (2012). Crossing boundaries between school and work during apprenticeships. Vocations and Learning, 5(2), 153–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-011-9073-6

Andersen, S. S. (2013). Case-studier og generalisering: Forskningsstrategi og design. Fagbokforlaget.

Bakker, A. & Akkerman, S. (2017). The learning potential of boundary crossing in the vocational curriculum. I L. U. David Guile (Red.), Handbook on vocational education (s. 351–372). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119098713.ch18

Berner, E. & Gonon, P. (2016). History of vocational education and training in Europe: Cases, concepts and challenges (Vol. 14). Peter Lang.

Breen, A. & Rekdahl, M. C. (2019). Bedriftenes perspektiver og behov når elevene er i yrkesfaglig praksis. Nordic Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 9(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3384/njvet.2242-458X.19911

Brouwer, P., Brekelmans, M., Nieuwenhuis, L. & Simons, R.-J. (2012). Communities of practice in the school workplace. Journal of Educational Administration, 50(3), 346–364.

Busher, H. & Harris, A. (1999). Leadership of school subject areas: Tensions and dimensions of managing in the middle. School Leadership & Management, 19(3), 305–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632439969069

Coburn, C. E. (2004). Beyond decoupling: Rethinking the relationship between the institutional environment and the classroom. Sociology of Education, 77(4), 21–44.

Cyert, R. M. & March, J. G. (1992). A behavioral theory of the firm (2. utg.). Blackwell.

Duguid, P. (2005). The art of knowing: Social and tacit dimensions of knowledge and the limits of the community of practice. Information Society, 21(2), 109–118.

Dæhlen, M., Hagen, A. & Hertzberg, D. M. (2008). Prosjekt til fordypning – mellom skole og arbeidsliv. Delrapport 1: Evalueringen av Kunnskapsløftet. Fafo. https://www.fafo.no/zoo-publikasjoner/fafo-notater/prosjekt-til-fordypning-mellom-skole-og-arbeidsliv-2

Emmenegger, P., Graf, L. & Trampusch, C. (2019). The governance of decentralised cooperation in collective training systems: A review and conceptualisation. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 71(1), 21–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2018.1498906

Feldman, M. (2000). Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organization Science, 11(6), 611–629.

Feldman, M. & Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 94–118. https://doi.org/10.2307/3556620

Forfang, H. (2020). Relationships and interactions between school owners and school principals: A case study of a Norwegian school district programme. Educational Management, Administration & Leadership, 49(6), 904–920. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220919766

Fuller, A., Hodkinson, H., Hodkinson, P. & Unwin, L. (2005). Learning as peripheral participation in communities of practice: A reassessment of key concepts in workplace learning. British Educational Research Journal, 31(1), 49–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192052000310029

Hawkins, M. & James, C. (2019). Exploring the ideas of coupling and complexity in schools. I B. L. J. Johnson & S. D. Kruse (Red.), Educational leadership, organizational learning, and the ideas of Karl Weick: Perspectives on theory and practice (s. 186–207). Routledge.

Helms Jørgensen, C. (2018). Vocational education and training in the Nordic countries: Different system and common challenges. I C. Helms Jørgensen, O. J. Olsen & D. Persson Thunqvist (Red.), Vocational education in the Nordic countries: Learning from diversity (s. 1–28). Routledge.

Helms Jørgensen, C., Järvinen, T. & Lundahl, L. (2019). A Nordic transition regime? Policies for school-to-work transitions in Sweden, Denmark and Finland. European Educational Research Journal, 18(3), 278–297. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904119830037

Helms Jørgensen, C., Olsen, O. J. & Persson Thunqvist, D. (Red.). (2018). Vocational education in the Nordic countries: Learning from diversity. Routledge.

Hiim, H. (2013). Praksisbasert yrkesutdanning: Hvordan utvikle relevant yrkesutdanning for elever og arbeidsliv? Gyldendal akademisk.

Jarl, M., Andersson, K. & Blossing, U. (2021). Organizational characteristics of successful and failing schools: A theoretical framework for explaining variation in student achievement. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 32(3), 448–464. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2021.1903941

Johnson, B. L. J. & Kruse, S. D. (Red.). (2019). Educational leadership, organizational learning, and the ideas of Karl Weick: Perspectives on theory and practice. Routledge.

Juul, I. & Helms Jørgensen, C. (2011). Challenges for the dual system and occupational self-governance in Denmark. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 63(3), 289–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2011.560393

Köpsén, S. & Andersson, P. (2018). Boundary processes in connection with students’ workplace learning: Potentials for VET teachers’ continuing professional development. Nordic Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 8(1), 58–75. https://doi.org/10.3384/njvet.2242-458X.188158

Lamb, S., Sandberg, N. & Markussen, E. (2011). School dropout and completion: International comparative studies in theory and policy. Springer.

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.

Levitt, B. & March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 319–340.

Louis, K. S., Mayrowetz, D., Smylie, M. & Murphy, J. (2009). The role of sensemaking and trust in developing distributed leadership. I A. Harris (Red.), Distributed leadership (s. 157–180). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9737-9

Malterud, K. (2012). Systematic text condensation: A strategy for qualitative analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 40(8), 795–805. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494812465030

March, J. G. (1994). A primer on decision making: How decisions happen. Free Press.

Markussen, E., Frøseth, M. W. & Sandberg, N. (2011). Reaching for the unreachable: Identifying factors predicting early school leaving and non-completion in Norwegian upper secondary education. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 55(3), 225–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2011.576876

Meld.St. 21. (2020-2021). Fullføringsreformen: Med åpne dører til verden og fremtiden. Kunnskapsdepartementet. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/meld.-st.-21-20202021/id2840771/?ch=1

Meyer, J. W. & Scott, W. R. (1992). Organizational environments: Ritual and rationality (2. utg.). Sage.

Michelsen, S. & Stenström, M.-L. (Red.). (2018). Vocational education in the Nordic countries. Routledge.

NOU 2018:2. Fremtidige kompetansebehov 1, Kunnskapsgrunnlaget. Norges offentlige utredninger. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/nou-2018-2/id2588070/

Nyen, T. & Tønder, A. H. (2012). Fleksibilitet eller faglighet? En studie av innføringen av faget prosjekt til fordypning i Kunnskapsløftet. Fafo. https://www.fafo.no/zoo-publikasjoner/fafo-rapporter/item/fleksibilitet-eller-faglighet

Nyen, T. & Tønder, A. H. (2014). Yrkesfagene under press. Universitetsforlaget.

Orton, J. D. & Weick, K. E. (1990). Loosely coupled systems: A re-conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 15(2), 203–223.

Paulsen, J. M. (2008). Managing adaptive learning from the middle. [Doktor-avhandling, Handelshøyskolen BI].

Polesel, J., Klatt, M., Blake, D. & Starr, K. (2017). Understanding the nature of school partnerships with business in delivery of vocational programmes in schools in Australia. Journal of Education & Work, 30(3), 283–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2016.1165344

Printy, S. M. (2008). Leadership for teacher learning: A community of practice perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(2), 187–226. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X07312958

Ragin, C. C. (1994). Constructing social research. Pine Forge Press.

Rerup, C. & Feldman, M. S. (2011). Routines as a source of change in organizational schemata: The role of trial-and-error learning. Academy of Management Journal, (3), 577–610. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310371691

Silver, C. & Woolf, N. H. (2015). From guided-instruction to facilitation of learning: The development of five-level QDA as a CAQDAS pedagogy that explicates the practices of expert users. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18(5), 527–543. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2015.1062626

Spain, A. K. & Woulfin, S. L. (2019). Past, present, and future of coupling as a leadership concept. I B. L. J. Johnson & S. D. Kruse (Red.), Educational leadership, organizational learning, and the ideas of Karl Weick: Perspectives on theory and practice (s. 162–185). Routledge.

Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. McGraw-Hill.

Utdanningsdirektoratet. (2018). Indikatorrapport for samfunnskontrakten 2018. https://www.udir.no/tall-og-forskning/finn-forskning/tema/indikatorrapport--for-samfunnskontrakten-2018/

Utdanningsdirektoratet. (2020). Yrkesfaglig fordypning for de yrkesfaglige utdanningsprogrammene (YFF). https://www.udir.no/utdanningslopet/videregaende-opplaring/felles-for-fagopplaringen/yrkesfagleg-fordjuping/yrkesfaglig-fordypning-for-de-yrkesfaglige-utdanningsprogrammene-yff/

Utvær, B. K. S. & Saur, E. (2019). Små-og stordriftsfordeler i yrkesfaglige løp: Stedets betydning for opplæring i skole og bedrift. Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education, 3(3), 43–60. https://doi.org/10.7577/njcie.3270

Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391875

Weick, K. E. & Roberts, K. H. (2001). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. I K. Weick (Red.), Making sense of the organization (s. 259–283). Blackwell.

Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7(2), 225–246.