Innovation in European Vocational Education and Training: network learning in England, Finland and Germany

Research in Comparative and International Education Volume 8 Number 4 2013 www.wwwords.co.uk/rcie Innovation in European Vocational Education and Training: network learning in England, Finland and Germany EILA HEIKKILÄ Helsinki, Finland ABSTRACT This article presents a comparative study of innovation in vocational education and training (VET) in three innovative European countries: England, Finland and Germany. The focus is on innovation emerging from VET practitioners (directors, teachers, project coordinators, etc.) participation in inter-organisational networks with local, regional, national, European or international reach. The concept of practitioner-driven innovation is introduced to describe the ways VET practitioners perceive participation in inter-organisational network learning to change and innovate practices in VET organisations. The findings of the comparative research, based on the literature of innovation and empirical studies in the three countries, indicate that the perceptions of VET practitioners on innovation, emerging from participation in inter-organisational networks, are largely convergent across the three European countries. The article suggests that VET practitioners perceive participation in inter-organisational network learning to enhance innovation in VET with, for example, specialisation, new training models, and professional development. While noting the limitations of the research, the article aims to contribute to present research and discussion of practice-based innovation and network learning in VET. Introduction The article is based on research carried out by the author whilst studying for the Doctor in Education (International) EdD at the Institute of Education, University of London between 2010-2012. Innovation is defined in the study broadly as any new policies and practices in vocational education and training (VET). The term network refers to alliances, partnerships and collaborative constellations between organisations (Engeström & Kerosuo, 2007). The European Commission and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) emphasise the role of education and training in contributing to innovation for competitiveness, as well as highlighting the need for innovation within education and training systems. Education and Training 2020 sets a strategic objective of enhancing creativity and innovation, including entrepreneurship, at all levels of education and training (European Council, 2011). While there has been a great deal of research into innovation in higher education, the sector of VET has received less attention in this respect. Nevertheless, innovation research in VET is important for parity of esteem given that, for example, in Finland, 43.92% of 16-year-old students chose initial VET in 2009. The three European countries studied in the research rank high in innovation.[1] Since England (the focus of this research in the United Kingdom), Finland and Germany have different models of VET, the interest here is to compare in what ways participation in inter-organisational networks is perceived by VET practitioners to bring innovation into VET in the three countries. The purpose of this article is to study innovation in VET from two perspectives. The first approach is drawn from the approach of employee-driven innovation (EDI) to research practitioner-driven innovation and the insights on innovation perceived by VET practitioners, who 428 http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/rcie.2013.8.4.428

Innovation in European Vocational Education and Training are directly involved in inter-organisational networks (Harmaakorpi, 2008; Høyrup et al, 2010; Kristensen, 2010; Møller, 2010). The EDI approach questions the previous research and development (R&D) model of innovation and argues that the dynamics of innovation is undergoing profound changes, where innovation is becoming globally distributed, involving more employee groups in networked, practice-based innovation processes. Secondly, the study draws from the theory of the globalising learning economy, noting that one of the most dramatic changes in present societies is the growing importance of networking and inter-firm cooperation in connection with innovation (Lundvall & Archibugi, 2001). The involvement of VET practitioners, such as VET directors, teachers, project coordinators etc., in inter-organisational networking across borders (organisational, sectoral, national, etc.) is argued in this article to be a source of outerdriven innovation in VET. In addition, the purpose of the article is to present the findings of the comparative research across the three European countries, regarding innovation emerging from inter-organisational networks in VET, as perceived by VET practitioners. Green (2002) argues that, while comparative education has its origins in national education systems, there is a need for non-national comparative research at different societal levels: in trans-national space and in sub-national regions and communities. The research was conducted at the level of VET organisations, where VET practitioners engaged in inter-organisational networks were interviewed in the three countries. The findings of the qualitative research were compared across the three countries in terms of convergence and divergence. Two research questions were set: 1. In what ways is participation in inter-organisational networks perceived by VET professionals to bring innovation into VET in the three countries? This first question was expanded with sub-questions: What is the value of innovation and to whom? What are the processes involved? What are the drivers of participation? What are the tensions? The second research question provided comparative analysis of the data: 2. What are the convergent and divergent perceptions of VET practitioners on innovation emerging from inter-organisational networks across the three European countries? This second question was expanded with a sub-question: To what extent do differences in VET models and VET professionals own roles and involvement help to explain the similarities and differences of perceptions on innovations emerging from inter-organisational networks in VET in the three countries? The comparative findings across the three VET models and countries aim to provide a wider picture of innovation emerging from inter-organisational networks, seen from the point of view of practitioners working in the field of VET in Europe. Methodology phenomenographic approach The research adopted a qualitative approach, since the aim was to investigate empirical insights and subjective experiences of VET practitioners working in VET organisations and directly involved in inter-organisational networks with local, regional, national, European or international reach (Robson, 2002). The phenomenographic approach provided a methodology for opening up VET practitioners world of work in inter-organisational networks, to form a picture of all the qualitatively different ways in which the phenomenon of innovation was perceived, in order to achieve a collective analysis of the perceptions in each of the countries studied (Marton & Booth, 1997). As a result, the methodology of phenomenography yielded findings limited to VET practitioners perceptions of the social reality (the phenomenon of innovation), but not findings representing the social reality itself. In the phenomenographic data analysis, the statements of VET practitioners on innovation emerging from inter-organisational networks were analysed (Marton, 1981). The study used an 429

Eila Heikkilä inductive approach where statements found to be of interest for the research questions were selected and narrowed down into fewer words (dimensions of variation). Next, the dimensions of variations were analysed and sorted into main categories (categories of description), according to the first research question and sub-questions. Finally, the categories of description were interpreted with regard to the context which they were taken from (Sherman & Webb, 1988; Dall Alba & Hasselgren, 1996). The next level of analysis addressed the second research question and included comparison of the outcomes of the first level of analysis, in terms of categories of description, across the three European countries and models of VET. In the comparison, the research benefited from the analytic methods of parallel demonstration of theory and the contrast of context to study the similarities and differences across the findings from the three country contexts of VET (Skocpol & Somers, 1980; Marginson & Mollis, 2001). The comparative study presents the convergent and divergent perceptions of VET practitioners, regarding in what ways inter-organisational networks bring innovation into VET, across the three European countries (Green et al, 1999). Profile of Sample VET practitioners from England, Finland and Germany The data collection method included in-depth interviews with purposive sampling, where the aim of the researcher was to work together with the interviewees (VET practitioners) toward an articulation of experiences and perceptions on innovation emerging from inter-organisational networks, as completely as possible (Marton & Booth, 1997). The empirical data were collected with semi-structured questionnaires in English in face-to-face and Skype interviews with VET professionals from England, Finland and Germany during the period 2010-2011. The criteria for research participation were defined as: (a) the participants worked in VET organisations in the countries studied; (b) had experience of involvement in networks (local, regional, national, European, international); and (c) had the English language skills for discussion in the interview. The research subjects were invited to participate in the interviews through the author s networks in the three countries (the Finnish Association for Vocational Education and Training [AIKE], the Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training [BIBB] in Germany, and the Institute of Education in England). The interviewees contacted the researcher to volunteer to participate in the research. The researcher did not know any of the research participants or their organisations before the interviews, to ensure confirmability (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The interviewees presented different job profiles in VET organisations, for example, director, researcher, project manager, international coordinator, teacher, etc. An agreement of confidentiality was made with the research participants in accordance with the ethical principles of the research. Within the scope of the thesis research, the data collection was limited to three to four in-depth interviews in each country. Despite the small sample size in the study, the in-depth interviews produced rich data of experiences and perceptions of VET practitioners on innovation emerging from engagement in inter-organisational networks in the context of their work in VET organisations in the three European countries. Theoretical Framework: practitioner-driven innovation in VET and globalising learning economies The theoretical framework for the research was drawn from a review of the literature on innovation. Innovation research helped to define the broad setting for the research of innovation in inter-organisational networks, where innovation is argued to result from collaboration, interdependence and continuing interaction of VET organisations and the practitioners with other organisations, such as companies, public authorities, universities, small and medium enterprises (SMEs), other VET colleges, and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). Due to the interdisciplinary nature of innovation research, it was argued that no single theory could explain the processes of innovation in inter-organisational networks (Fagerberg et al, 2005). Therefore, the research was broadly framed according to two main sets of theories: practitioner-driven innovation drawn from EDI and network learning in the globalising learning economy. 430

Innovation in European Vocational Education and Training The research introduces the concept of practitioner-driven innovation as being suited for VET practitioners who are engaged in inter-organisational networks in VET. The research emphasises the link between innovation and learning in the context of VET practitioners work in inter-organisational networks. Learning in inter-organisational networks is seen to include different forms of learning: informal and formal learning, learning by participation, reflection, experimentation, etc. As a result, this kind of learning can bring about significant changes in the organisation of work in VET; it can challenge routines and structures and call into question the accepted knowledge and culture that hold organisations together, including VET organisations (Høyrup et al, 2010). Innovations are increasingly seen to emerge in practice-based processes, combining both practical and scientific knowledge. These innovation processes are typically cooperative, non-linear processes, where knowledge production is triggered by different kinds of sources and where scientific theoretical approaches are an exception (Harmaakorpi, 2008). In this study, inter-organisational networks, with local, regional, national, European and international reach, are seen as spaces for learning and outer-driven innovation in VET. Consequently, interorganisational networks are argued to provide innovation sources from different kinds of organisations, practices and cultures for VET practitioners to learn, create knowledge and bring back new knowledge, change and innovation into their VET organisations. The theory of the globalising learning economy points out the importance of building innovative networks with other organisations, such as suppliers, users, and competitors, for competence building and innovation in a new knowledge-based economy. Networking is required in the knowledge economy because of a highly developed division of labour, and the fact that products and technologies have become more complex regarding their knowledge base. As a result, no single firm can control all the elements necessary to develop a new product, process or service, and, therefore, competence building has become a collective effort for formally separate organisations (Lundvall & Archibugi, 2001). It is argued in the study that, especially in VET, where the training provision needs to keep up with the latest technological advancements in different sectors of the economy (for example, construction, health services, the travel industry), there is a need for inter-organisational networking with different kinds of organisations, such as companies, universities and public authorities, for competence-building and innovation. The study suggests that networking is one way how VET organisations can respond to the challenges of competence building in globalising learning economies. Further, Wenger (2000) argues that the success of organisations depends on their ability to design themselves as social learning systems and to participate in broader learning systems, such as an industry, a region or a consortium. The participation of VET organisations and their practitioners in social learning systems, locally, regionally, nationally or internationally, ensures the development of quality vocational training provision and processes in collaboration with network partners in a knowledge economy. Engeström notes the role of individual people in network learning and argues that changes must be initiated and nurtured by real, identifiable people, individuals and groups. Engeström continues that, in important transformations of our lives and organisational practices, we must learn new forms of activity that are not yet there: they are literally learned as they are being created and, therefore, there is no competent teacher. Concepts, such as co-configuration, collaborative learning, or even social production, are examples of efforts to conceptualise the ongoing historical transformations in work and organisations, also in the field of VET (Engeström, 2001). 431 Comparative Analysis of Findings across England, Finland and Germany In What Ways is Participation in Inter-organisational Networks Perceived by VET Professionals to bring Innovation into VET in the Three European Countries? The logical approach to compare the categories of description and dimensions of variation across the data from the three countries is to analyse them according to the research questions, starting with the first research question: in what ways is participation in inter-organisational networks perceived by VET professionals to bring innovation into VET in the three European countries?. The study shows that participation in inter-organisational networks is perceived by VET practitioners to bring innovation into VET in largely convergent ways across the three countries.

Eila Heikkilä The study yields some similar categories of description, for example specialisation, new training models and professional development. Specialisation developed in inter-organisational networks is perceived by VET practitioners to innovate VET provision in all the three countries. Also new training models are perceived by VET practitioners to be developed in networks, according to training needs of customers, like companies. Networks of VET organisations with universities are perceived by VET practitioners to provide professional development opportunities for VET staff. In addition, international networks in VET are perceived to provide internationalisation skills, language skills, and skills for working abroad for VET organisations and their staff, especially in Finland and Germany. On the other hand, the study yielded also divergent categories of description regarding the first research question. In the data from Germany, VET professionals refer to curriculum and its adaptation in partnership with companies to address the labour market needs and to innovate VET provision. However, in the data from England and Finland, the concept of curriculum is not mentioned. This difference can be explained by the different VET system in Germany (the dual system) and its governance style with the regulation of curricula. Another divergence relates to the category of description labelled new training paths to enter higher education, which was not perceived in the data from Finland. This divergence is most likely due to the sample. Finland implemented a reform by introducing a level of vocational higher education in universities of applied sciences or polytechnics in 1996 (International Standard Classification of Education, 1997 [ISCED 1997], level 5A). VET organisations involved in the study in Finland were vocational adult education institutions, where the focus is on initial and continuing vocational education and training, but not preparing for higher education studies, where the vocational higher education institutions would be the normal route. Finally, internationalisation developed in interorganisational networks was perceived by VET practitioners to innovate VET in Finland and Germany, but not discussed with the same emphasis in the data from England. This could be explained by the roles of the VET practitioners involved in the study in England, who were involved in inter-organisational networks, but not in international networks in their VET organisations. What is the Value of these Innovations and to Whom? The first sub-question of question 1 inquired: what is the value of the innovations and to whom?. There were some convergent categories of description regarding beneficiaries of innovation emerging from inter-organisational networks, such as VET students, companies and VET organisations. Divergent categories of description were related to the beneficiaries: employees, community and society. VET practitioners from all three countries perceived VET students to benefit from innovation developed in inter-organisational networks. There were a number of dimensions to the variations in how innovations were perceived by VET practitioners to benefit VET students, for example, with improved employability, improved quality of VET provision and qualifications and even special training. Companies were perceived by VET practitioners to benefit from theoretical knowledge and skilled students in all three countries. VET organisations and their staff were perceived by VET practitioners to benefit from inter-organisational networks in similar ways across the three countries, for example financially, but also with professional development as described earlier. The data from all countries make reference to the economic sectors in which VET organisations are working (for example, the hospitality industry, logistics, transportation). In the data from England and Finland, inter-organisational networks were perceived to benefit communities and societies with improved employment, entrepreneurship and taxation. While VET practitioners from Germany did not explicitly describe the benefits of innovation emerging from inter-organisational networks for the community and society, the importance of the dual VET system as an integral part of German society for centuries was pointed out in the interviews. What are the Processes Involved? The categories of description answering the second sub-question of question 1 what are the processes involved? were convergent across the three countries, factoring people, learning and 432

Innovation in European Vocational Education and Training partner relations. In the data from all of the three countries, the importance of individual people in the processes of innovation in inter-organisational networks was perceived by VET practitioners in a similar way, confirming the approach of practitioner-driven innovation. As it was noted in one of the statements from Finland, the institutes are not cooperating, but the people from the institutes are cooperating, and the results are coming to the institute. The relationships between people participating in networks of VET were described as having trust, friendship and collaboration with people who think alike and who work well together. Learning is perceived by VET practitioners as a central element in innovation processes in a convergent way across all the countries studied. Learning is described with a number of dimensions of variation in the data, for example, sharing, peer learning, benchmarking, mutual learning, skills development, interchange of ideas. Learning is perceived to take place in a variety of ways. Informal learning is perceived to take place in exchanges of ideas between colleagues, but there is also formal learning perceived in the context of student and teacher exchanges and mobility programmes. Some of the formal learning was perceived by VET practitioners to be organised with the support of information and communications technology (ICT) across the national borders; for example, the continuing professional development of teachers. Partner relations are perceived to be important in a convergent way across the three countries. Dimensions of variation in data emphasise the importance of finding suitable network partners, knowing the network partners well and having existing, long-term relations with network partners. What are the Drivers for Participation? The categories of description answering the third sub-question of question 1 what are the drivers for participation? were convergent and divergent across the three countries. The drivers for participation were perceived by VET practitioners as external, such as student, customer and stakeholder needs, as well as internal, such as the needs of VET organisations. For example, the need to develop new vocational training products and processes with companies was perceived by VET practitioners as a driving force in all VET organisations studied in the research. VET organisations were also perceived by VET practitioners to have policies and to set goals, as well as existing needs to participate, work and learn in inter-organisational networks. There were some accentuations regarding the driving forces which were divergent in the data. Efficiency was a dimension of variation with similar notions coming out of the data from England and Finland, but not with the same emphasis from the German data, where keeping up with the development of labour market needs was emphasised. Internationalisation was perceived as a driving force to participate in inter-organisational networks in the data from Finland and Germany, but not in the data from England, which can be explained by the sample of interviewees from England, as described earlier. What are the Tensions? The response to the fourth sub-question provided largely convergent perceptions by VET practitioners, noting tensions related to learning and innovation in inter-organisational networks of VET in all the three countries. Resistance to organisational change and resistance to participation in inter-organisational networks were perceived as a tension in a similar way across the data from the three countries. As it was noted in the data from England: we had to change over the last two years and turn all around and say, look, you [company] say what you want and how you want it delivered, so there were tensions culturally to us [VET college] as an organisation. Competition was perceived by VET practitioners similarly in the data from England and Finland, but not in the data from Germany. For example, it was noted in the data from England that there are other VET colleges in the network, so partly we are competing with them and partly we are collaborating with them, so it depends on the issue. The voluntary nature of participation in European and international networks was perceived to cause a gap between those VET professionals who are interested in participation in inter-organisational networking and those who are not. In the data, one VET professional from Germany estimated that around 50% of teachers are actively involved 433

Eila Heikkilä in international networks in the college. One explanation for the resistance to participation was suggested to be the lack of language skills. Implications of the Study The research aims to contribute to innovation research in the specific area of inter-organisational networks in VET. The research has studied perceptions of VET practitioners on innovation emerging from inter-organisational networks in three European countries. VET organisations were perceived by VET practitioners to form inter-organisational networks with different kinds of organisations in their locality, region and country, but also in other countries, in all the three countries. VET practitioners perceived inter-organisational networks to bring innovation into VET organisations and to improve education and training provision with, for example, specialisation, new training models and professional development. According to VET practitioners perceptions, innovation and learning in networks is organised within the different economic and vocational sectors, which the VET organisations provide training in. It can be concluded from the study that VET organisations are perceived to change and innovate their VET provision and processes and to attract new opportunities, customers and income, even with international reach, through the participation of VET practitioners in inter-organisational networks. The practitioner-driven approach of the study has aimed to bring empirical insight into innovation in VET, in the context of inter-organisational networks in the three European countries. The findings of the research suggest that VET practitioners perceive their participation in interorganisational networks to bring innovation into VET organisations training provision and processes. The study reveals the important role of individual VET practitioners in innovating VET organisations through their participation in inter-organisational network learning with local, regional, national or international reach. The human agency and the learning acquired in interorganisational networks may challenge and change the routines and question accepted practices and bring about innovation in VET organisations. The practitioner-driven approach of innovation adopted in the study will have implications for VET in general. It is argued that the informal learning of individual VET practitioners in inter-organisational networks and the potential of innovation could be more valued and shared for organisational learning in VET organisations. In addition, the study indicates tension between those VET professionals who participate in international networks and those who do not. The research suggests that there is a need for preservice and in-service training to facilitate participation, learning and innovation of VET practitioners in inter-organisational networks in European and international contexts. The findings of the study suggest that inter-organisational networks are becoming increasingly important for learning, competence building and innovation also in VET organisations. VET organisations are perceived to build networks with a variety of organisations ranging from companies, which are their customers, to other education and training organisations, which are their competitors, both locally, regionally, nationally and internationally. It can be argued that VET provision is becoming more complex and specialised in its knowledge base, and therefore, competence building and networking with other organisations are needed. The research findings suggest that, at the heart of network learning, there is collaboration, interdependence and continuing interaction related to innovation processes in inter-organisational networks in VET. VET practitioners are learning from others, informally or formally, in inter-organisational networks and bringing learning and innovation back in VET provision and the processes of their organisations. The study has looked at the level of practice in VET in three European countries and researched VET practitioners perceptions on innovation emerging from inter-organisational networks with comparisons across the three countries. This study has produced findings of externally sourced innovation, where purposive inflows and outflows of knowledge and learning are accelerating international innovation in VET organisations. In this research, networking with other organisations is perceived to bring value and benefits to a number of target groups: VET students and companies, as well as VET organisations and staff, as perceived by VET practitioners. It is argued that networking is one way in which VET organisations can transform their systems and practices internally, while also contributing to innovation and growth in society at large. The 434

Innovation in European Vocational Education and Training research has covered three different models of VET in three highly innovative countries in Europe. The findings based on VET practitioners perceptions suggest that innovation and learning processes in inter-organisational networks are largely convergent across the VET models and countries in Europe. The convergence could indicate that the processes of innovation in interorganisational networks have some global patterns, which are similar across the three European countries. There are also divergent findings in the study, which are explained with the different roles of the VET professionals included in the study, as well as the different VET models in the countries. The limitations of the research findings relate to the qualitative approach of the research and the limited number of research participants involved in the small-scale study. In addition, the empirical findings of the research need to be read bearing in mind that they are based on VET practitioners perceptions. It is also important to note that the researcher acted as an interpreter of the realities, constructed by the VET practitioners, and the theories developed in the research (Bogdan & Biklen, 1982). Based on the findings of the research, the aim here is to provide recommendations for academic research, policy-making and practice in VET. The approach of practitioner-driven innovation brings new insight into the research and understanding of innovation in VET. Given the EDI approach, innovation research in education should not be exclusive to higher education, but should include also other sectors in education, and especially VET, for parity of esteem. The approach of practitioner-driven innovation studied here has aimed to bring new insight into the research and understanding of innovation in inter-organisational networks of VET at the level of practice. The findings suggest that educational policy-making, both European and national, should more strongly support the networking of VET organisations with other organisations, customers and stakeholders locally, regionally, nationally and internationally, in order to enhance innovation in VET. While noting the limited scope of the research, it is recommended that policies and funding instruments should facilitate and support the long-term inter-organisational network learning of VET organisations for innovation. Based on the findings of the research, organisations working in the field of VET and their management are encouraged to support the participation of their staff and teachers in inter-organisational networking to learn and further transform the practices of their organisations. It is also recommended that VET professionals and teachers would be better prepared through pre-service and in-service teacher training to cope with the changes in VET and new professional challenges in terms of participation in networking, especially regarding international networks. The facilitation of human resource development and participation in interorganisational learning is a key factor for VET organisations wishing to benefit from innovation emerging from inter-organisational networks in VET within their countries, in Europe and beyond. Notes [1] Innovation by country at: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_inn-economy-innovation References Bogdan, R.C. & Biklen, S.K. (1982) Qualitative Research for Education: an introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Dall Alba, G. & Hasselgren, B. (Eds) (1996) Reflections on Phenomenography: toward a methodology. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis. Engeström, Y. (2001) Expansive Learning at Work: toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization, Journal of Education and Work, 14, 133-157. Engeström, Y. & Kerosuo, H. (2007) From Workplace Learning to Inter-Organizational Learning and Back: the contribution of activity theory, Journal of Workplace Learning, 19(6), 336-342. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13665620710777084 European Council (2011) Council Conclusions on the Role of Education and Training in the Implementation of the Europe 2020 Strategy, Official Journal of the European Union, 54(March), C 70/1. Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D.C. & Nelson, R.R. (Eds) (2005) Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 435

Eila Heikkilä Green, A. (2002) Education, Globalisation and the Role of Comparative Research. Stevenage: Peartree Press. Green, A., Leney, T. & Wolf, A. (1999) Convergence and Divergence in European Education and Training Systems. London: Institute of Education, University of London. Harmaakorpi, V. (2008) Knowledge Production in Networked Practice-based Innovation Processes interrogative model as a methodological approach, Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge and Management, 3, 80-100. Høyrup, S., Møller, K. & Rocha, R.S. (2010) Editorial, Transfer, 16(2), 131-134. International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) (1997) http://www.uis.unesco.org/education/iscedmappings/pages/default.aspx Kristensen, P.H. (2010) Transformative Dynamics of Innovation and Industry: new roles for employees?, Transfer, 16(2), 171-183. Lundvall, B.Å. & Archibugi, D. (Eds) (2001) The Globalising Learning Economy. New York: Oxford University Press. Marginson, S. & Mollis, M. (2001) The Door Opens and the Tiger Leaps: theories and reflexivities of comparative education for a global millennium, Comparative Education Review, 45, 581-615. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/447693 Marton, F. (1994) Phenomenography: describing conceptions of the world around us, Instructional Science, 10, 177-200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf00132516 Marton, F. & Booth, S. (1997) Learning and Awareness. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis. London: Sage. Møller, K. (2010) EDI-Europe Network, Transfer, 16(2), 261-263. Robson, C. (2002) Real World Research: a resource for social scientists and practitioner-researchers. Oxford: Blackwell. Sherman, R. & Webb, R. (Eds) (1988) Qualitative Research in Education: focus and methods. East Sussex: Falmer. Skocpol, T. & Somers, M. (1980) The Uses of Comparative History in Macrosocial Inquiry, Comparative Studies in Society and History, 22(2), 174-197. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0010417500009282 Wenger, E. (2000) Communities of Practice and Social Learning Systems, Organization, 7(2), 225-246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/135050840072002 EILA HEIKKILÄ (EdD International, MA, MBA) is a researcher and expert of education with long professional experience in vocational adult education in Finland and in European lifelong learning programmes. Dr Heikkilä has graduated from the Doctor in Education (International) EdD at the Institute of Education, University of London. Correspondence: eilaheikkila@hotmail.com 436