Advertisement

Development of Strategic Partnerships for Work-Based Learning

  • Ilze BuliginaEmail author
  • Biruta Sloka
Conference paper
Part of the Eurasian Studies in Business and Economics book series (EBES, volume 10/1)

Abstract

Competitiveness of companies on local and international markets greatly depends on skilled labor force. There is an increased need for well-trained medium level specialists prepared by the vocational education and training (VET) systems. For countries with school-based VET systems tailor made approaches for work-based learning need to be implemented. This requires also new strategic partnerships. In Latvia in 2016 legal regulation on work-based learning was adopted. However, there is little research on the pre-conditions enabling the public administration to implement innovative VET approaches. The purpose of the study is to investigate the opinions of relevant public stakeholders from the education, employment and economic sectors regarding innovation in VET and the feasibility of strategic partnerships in this regard. The methods used: public administrators’ survey results analysis in scale of 1–10. For data processing of survey results indicators of descriptive statistics (means and indicators of variability) as well as cross tabulations and multivariate analysis—factor analysis were applied. For countries with school-based systems work-based learning as an innovative form of VET requires partnerships by public stakeholders from various branches. Strategic partnerships beyond the national level might be beneficial, especially among countries with historically similar educational and cultural backgrounds.

Keywords

Work-based learning Innovation Vocational education and training Partnerships Competitive labor force 

Notes

Acknowledgment

The paper is supported by the National Research Program 5.2. EKOSOC-LV.

References

  1. Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2012). Crossing boundaries between school and work during apprenticeships. Vocations and Learning, 5(2), 153–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amoroso, S., Audretsch, D. B., & Link, A. N. (2018). Sources of knowledge used by entrepreneurial firms in the European high-tech sector. Eurasian Business Review, 8(1), 55–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berner, B. (2010). Crossing boundaries and maintaining differences between school and industry: Forms of boundary-work in Swedish vocational education. Journal of Education and Work, 23(1), 27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biemans, H., Wesselink, R., Gulikers, J., Schaafsma, S., Verstegen, J., & Mulder, M. (2009). Towards competence-based VET: Dealing with the pitfalls. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 61(3), 267–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brewer, M. L., Flavell, H. L., & Jordon, J. (2017). Interprofessional team-based placements: The importance of space, place, and facilitation. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 31(4), 429–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Buckley, P., & Doyle, E. (2014). Gamification and student motivation. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(6), 1–15.Google Scholar
  7. Buligina, I., & Sloka, B. (2014). Investing in skills and innovation – New strategic tasks for public administrations. European Integration Studies, 8, 115–123.Google Scholar
  8. Buligina, I., & Sloka, B. (2016). Strategic partnerships for the development of competitive labor force through vocational education and training. Entrepreneurship Business and Economics, 3(1), 229–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cedefop. (2010). The development of ECVET in Europe (Cedefop working paper; No 10). Luxembourg: Publications Office. [online] Accessed February 10, 2017, from http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/Files/6110_en.pdf
  10. Cedefop. (2011). The development of ECVET in Europe (Cedefop working paper; No 14). Luxembourg: Publications Office. [online] Accessed February 12, 2017, from http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/Files/6114_en.pdf
  11. Cedefop. (2012a). Necessary conditions for ECVET implementation. Luxembourg: Publications Office. [online] Accessed March 16, 2017, from http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/Files/4113_en.pdf
  12. Cedefop. (2012b). Development of national qualifications frameworks in Europe: October 2011 (Cedefop working paper; No 12). Luxembourg: Publications Office. [online] Accessed March 22, 2017, from http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/Files/6112_en.pdf
  13. Cedefop. (2012c). The development of ECVET in Europe 2011 (Cedefop working paper; No 14). Luxembourg: Publications Office. [online] Accessed March 15, 2017, from http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/Files/6114_en.pdf
  14. Cedefop. (2015). Skills, qualifications and jobs in the EU: The making of a perfect match? Evidence from Cedefop’s European skills and jobs survey. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union [online] Accessed February 16, 2017, from http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/publications-and-resources/publications/3072
  15. De Bruijn, E., & Leeman, Y. (2011). Authentic and self-directed learning in vocational education: Challenges to vocational educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(4), 694–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Demir, E., & Ersan, O. (2017). Economic policy uncertainty and cash holdings: Evidence from BRIC countries. Emerging Markets Review, 33, 189–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Demir, E., & Gozgor, E. (2018). Does economic policy uncertainty affect Tourism? Annals of Tourism Research, 69, 15–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. European Commission. (2012). Proposal for a Council recommendation on the validation of non-formal and informal learning. COM(2012) 485 final. [online] Accessed February 23, 2017, from http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/doc/informal/proposal2012_en.pdf
  19. European Parliament. (2008). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on the establishment of the European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning (2008/c 111/01). [online] Accessed January 31, 2017, from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32008H0506(01)&from=EN
  20. Jee, S. D., Schafheutle, E. I., & Noyce, P. R. (2017). Using longitudinal mixed methods to study the development of professional behaviours during pharmacy work-based training. Health and Social Care in the Community, 25(3), 975–986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kultti, K., Takalo, T., & Tanayama, T. (2015). R&D spillovers and information exchange: A case study. Eurasian Economic Review, 5(1), 63–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lorenz, E., Lundvall, B.-A., Kraemer-Mbula, E., & Rasmussen, P. (2016). Work organisation, forms of employee learning and national systems of education and training. European Journal of Education, 51(2), 154–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pilc, M. (2017). Cultural, political and economic roots of the labor market institutional framework in the OECD and post-socialist countries. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 12(4), 713–731.Google Scholar
  24. Pillay, H., Watters, J. J., Hoff, L., & Flynn, M. (2014). Dimensions of effectiveness and efficiency: A case study on industry–school partnerships. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 66(4), 537–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rehman, N. U. (2017). Self-selection and learning-by-exporting hypotheses: Micro-level evidence. Eurasian Economic Review, 7(1), 133–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sánchez-Martín, J., Cañada-Cañada, F., & Dávila-Acedo, M. A. (2017). Just a game? Gamifying a general science class at University: Collaborative and competitive work implications. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 26, 51–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sappa, V., Choy, S., & Aprea, C. (2016). Stakeholders’ conceptions of connecting learning at different sites in two national VET systems. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 68(3), 283–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Śledzik, K. (2013). Knowledge based economy in a neo–Schumpeterian point of view. Equilibrium Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 8(4), 67–77.Google Scholar
  29. Statham, A., & Scullion, J. (2017). Assessing students’ reflections on work-placed modules. European Political Science, 16(2), 148–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Van der Zwan, P., Thurik, R., Verheul, I., & Hessels, J. (2016). Factors influencing the entrepreneurial engagement of opportunity and necessity entrepreneurs. Eurasian Business Review, 6(3), 273–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Van Praag, L., Van Caudenberg, R., Nouwen, W., Clycq, N., & Timmerman, C. (2017). How to support and engage students in alternative forms of education and training? A qualitative study of school staff members in Flanders. Journal of Education and Work, 19, 1–13.Google Scholar
  32. Zitter, I., Hoeve, A., & de Bruijn, E. (2016). A design perspective on the school-work boundary: A hybrid curriculum model. Vocations and Learning, 9(1), 111–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Business, Management and EconomicsUniversity of LatviaRigaLatvia

Personalised recommendations