Abstract
The integrative learning of theory and practice has been widely recognised as a cornerstone of today’s technical vocational education and training (T-VET). Considerable uncertainty persists regarding how to construe such integrative learning, let alone regarding how it proceeds or what it generates. This article reports an in-depth qualitative study designed to clarify the concept of integrative learning by advancing current understanding of what constitutes the integrative learning of theory and practice (ILTP) in terms of both its process and its outcome aspects. In all, 48 key actors in dual T-VET (students, tutors and mentors) participated in serial focus groups, class observations and apprenticeship observations. The constant comparison method was used to generate a description of both the learning process and the learning outcome based on descriptive axial dimensions along which learning and knowledge were positioned. More specifically, we distinguished three process dimensions (intentionality, time of the prompt and locus of learning) and three outcome dimensions (purpose, logic and locus of integrated knowledge). All in all, the findings can be understood only in consideration of co-existing perspectives on integration according to which the separation of theory and practice is more or less marked. The article discusses expected implications for practitioners and future research.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barber, J. P. (2012). Integration of learning: A grounded theory analysis of college students’ learning. American Educational Research Journal, 49(3), 590–617.
Beckett, D. (2000). Making workplace learning explicit: An epistemology of practice for the whole person. Westminster Studies in Education, 23(1), 41–53.
Billett, S. (2008). Subjectivity, learning and work: Sources and legacies. Vocations and Learning, 1(2), 149–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-008-9009-y.
Billett, S. (2009). Personal epistemologies, work and learning. Educational Research Review, 4(3), 210–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2009.06.001.
Brandom, R. (1995). Knowledge and the social articulation of the space of reasons. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 55(4), 895–908.
Brandom, R. (2000). Articulating reasons: An introduction to Inferentialism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Cedefop (2015). Vocational pedagogies and benefits for learners: Practices and challenges in Europe. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Cedefop research paper; No 47.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.). New York: Routledge.
Eraut, M. (2000). Non-formal learning and tacit knowledge in professional work. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 113–136.
Gessler, M., & Howe, F. (2015). From the reality of work to grounded work-based learning in German vocational education and training: Background, concept and tools. International Journal for Research in Vocational Education and Training (IJRVET), 2(3 Special Issue), 214–238.
Glaser, B. G. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis: emergence vs. forcing. Mill Valley: Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1971). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.
Guile, D. (2006). Learning across contexts. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 38(3), 251–268.
Guile, D. (2010). The learning challenge of the knowledge economy (Vol. 3). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Heusdens, W. T., Bakker, A., Baartman, L. K. J., & De Bruijn, E. (2016). Contextualising vocational knowledge: A theoretical framework and illustrations from culinary education. Vocations and Learning, 9(2), 151–165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-015-9145-0.
Heusdens, W. T., Baartman, L. K. J., & de Bruijn, E. (2018). Knowing everything from soup to dessert: An exploratory study to describe what characterises students’ vocational knowledge. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 1–20.
Hiim, H. (2017). Ensuring curriculum relevance in vocational education and training: Epistemological perspectives in a curriculum research project. International Journal for Research in Vocational Education and Training, 4(1), 1–19.
Maxwell, J. A. (2004). Using qualitative methods for causal explanations. Field Methods, 243–264.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Mortelmans, D. (2007). Handboek Kwalitatieve Onderzoeksmethode. [Manual of qualitative research methods. Leuven: Uitgeverij Acco.
Mortelmans, D. (2011). Kwalitatieve analyse met NVivo. [Qualitative analysis with NVivo. Leuven: Uitgeverij Acco.
O'Reilly, K. (2004). Ethnographic methods (1st ed.). London: Routledge.
Schaap, H., Baartman, L., & de Bruijn, E. (2012). Students’ learning processes during school-based learning and workplace learning in vocational education: A review. Vocations and Learning, 5(2), 99–117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-011-9069-2.
Segers, M., & Van den Haar, S. (2012). The experiential learning theory: D. Kolb and D. Boud. In F. Dochy, D. Gijbels, M. Segers, & P. Van den Bossche (Eds.), Theories of learning for the workplace: building blocks for training and professional development Programs (pp. 52–65). Abingdon: Routledge.
Songer, N. B., & Linn, M. C. (1991). How do students’ views of science influence knowledge integration? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9), 761–784.
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Tynjälä, P. (2008). Perspectives into learning at the workplace. Educational Research Review, 3(2), 130–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2007.12.001.
Tynjälä, P. (2013). Toward a 3-P model of workplace learning: A literature review. Vocations and Learning, 6(1), 11–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-012-9091-z.
Winch, C. (2010). Dimensions of expertise: A conceptual exploration of vocational knowledge. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Christiane Timmerman passed away before publication of this work was completed.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Orozco, M., Gijbels, D. & Timmerman, C. Empirical Conceptualisation of Integrative Learning. A Focus on Theory-Practice Integration in Technical Vocational Education and Training. Vocations and Learning 12, 405–424 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-019-09223-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-019-09223-2