Riccardo Armillei 0:06
I'm here with my colleagues from the Europe Center and we welcome everybody who's either with us or is online, and especially to our two speakers, and give me a moment before I introduce them.
Umm, this is part of our project for the European Union and we have already had two previous events related to multi multi governance.
And looking at different scenarios in Europe where there might be models which give us some understanding of how different levels of government and governance may may occur and how decisions are made and to what extent is there a point, to what extent is there a also a focus on giving a voice to all all actors and parties in, in the decision making and whether there is a deficit of democracy.
And before I go any further, I just want to ensure that there's no objections to us recording for purposes of, of note taking and report writing.
I'm not hearing any.
Uh, and thank you very much for that.
Umm the the the webinar that we're engaging tonight, we'll explore the multilevel aspects of higher education governance after the Bologna reforms.
From a German perspective and our two speakers will be addressing that it will also attempt to establish whether broadening the range of actors addresses the democratic deficit or the lack of a voice so often inherent in a top down governance process, and whether in and in which circumstances governance approach that incorporates a variety of actors within and outside formal government structures, is efficient or more efficient and more effective.
Umm, before proceeding any further, I'd like to also make an acknowledgement of country and indicate how umm now acknowledgement on behalf of RMIT University of the people of the war room and the Boonruang language groups of Eastern cooling nations on whose unseated lands we conduct our business are respectfully acknowledge their ancestors and elders, past and present.
I also knowledge the traditional custodians and ancestors of the lands and waters across Australia where we conduct our business this evening.
What I'd like to also ensure that it's from a, a housekeeping standpoint.
We will be asking our speakers to keep to a 101012 minute presentation if possible, asking for questions to be directed at the end of the presentations to allow a more structured conversation and debate, and this is the conversation in particular with our two speakers, by all means colleagues who are online indicate you're at any point in time any questions that you wish for us to present to the speakers.
Pam Jonas joined the meeting
Riccardo Armillei 3:23
And if I could just ask that all online, please mute your computer or whatever other device you're using.
OK, but now it's now my.
My to introduce our first of our two speakers, a good friend and colleague, Professor Leo, got that Deboo, who's honorary professor, professorial fellow and University of Melbourne and honorary Professor and Co director of the Gippsland Smart Specialisation Strategy Project, with ourselves that RMIT the professor has interest in the which include governance and management at the systems and institutional level system dynamics, including large scale.
Restructuring policies.
University industry relationships and institutional mergers.
The professor has also worked in across Europe and Australia and most of the work present comparative focus both within and outside of Europe allow me to welcome the Professor Wonderboom and to pronounce, if you would like to take the stage and present the, you know, make your presentation.
Thank you.
Leo Goedegebuure 4:38
That's alright Bruno.
Thanks very much and I pleasure to be with you all.
Let me know if the sound breaks up or anything like that and if it's OK let me perfect.
Look, let me let me start with a bit of a personal story and I'll try to be brief about all of this.
And I'm Dutch, so based born in the Netherlands came to Australia in 2005 and most of my professional life has been involved in higher education policy and management.
So I my background is in public administration.
I started at the center of hydration Policy Studies at the University of 20 in 1984 and and that that's important to me as it explains a bit of what I've been asked to do.
I've been asked to talk about Bologna.
I'm gonna ask to talk about the open method of coordination.
I've been asked to talk about sort of multi level governance arrangements in in Europe and I will tackle that for starters, at least they will get bit later on about the discussion from my practical experience in in the Netherlands.
Uh, so my story starts in 1996, when the then director of chips.
The scent of hydration Policy Studies was elected to become what is called the rector magnificence of the University of 20 UH, which is uncommon to menology for anyone in Australia, but it essentially means, and the one responsible for the full education portfolio of university uh.
Viv Sercombe joined the meeting
Leo Goedegebuure 6:40
So, but you would now call the Vice Chancellor, the chief executive or whatever.
And I joined him in 1996 as his deputy.
Viv Sercombe 6:50
I have this new.
What's your mind?
Leo Goedegebuure 6:52
Uh, so moving from research and policy analysis to actually 2 feet in the mud doing the practical things.
Which is really interesting and and one of the first things we try to do was changed the educational structure of the programs at the University of 20, which was and chillies are predominantly a Technical University with with a serious bit of social sciences, primarily in business administration, public administration and educational technology.
So our efficient was pretty much like what now is known in Australia as the Melbourne model trying to get people to do not only their own discipline but something outside of that which in our view was trying to mix up engineering with social sciences and social sciences with engineering, which at that time meant that my primary job was to talk the engineers out of half a year of their education program to free it up for something.
That was non engineering.
And mind you, at that time we had a 5 year engineering program leading to a master and a four year social science program leading to a master trying to get engineers to give up half a year of their own.
Curriculum is more than putting teeth.
It is because of five year engineering program really is already too short.
It should be six or seven years, so those are really interesting experience.
I won't go into the details all over all of that, but we succeeded in doing all of that.
And then in 1999 came Bologna.
So we've just spent three years changing our whole curriculum.
Uh, after which bolognia?
Sort of.
Must move to the scene which which was quite surprising cause we look at it from our perspective.
Here were two people who supposedly knew all about higher education policy, who were leading researchers in European field, and we were completely caught off guard by what happened in 1999 in Bologna when the education ministers met and said, AH, wouldn't it be a good idea to harmonize our educational systems across Europe?
And I won't say the words that we used at that time, but it wasn't very helpful for us at all. Having spent 3 years working internally about a new educational philosophy, which really sorted around majors and minors and all of that which was at that time completely unknown in the Dutch structure and all of a sudden, he comes the idea well.
I need to move to a masters, a bachelor, masters and electoral program based only three year, one year to year and two year three year program.
It didn't do us any good.
Didn't make any friends in the institution, but it's an interesting example of how something that started as a voluntary process.
And because at 9099 we have the European Ministers of Education meet and say, well, this was a logical extension of what seemed to be the way Europe is going free movement, I'm sorry, your personnel across borders, jobs that will be open to anyone and a recognition of degrees as they stood at to make the transfer of jobs and movement of people across borders much easier.
Fascinating progress approach project and a process which from a voluntary thing almost turned into something that was sorry, seen by many, especially in Eastern Europe.
As a law, we need to move to Bologna ourselves.
We need to have a three year special program, a one year master program and a three year doctoral program.
If you look back at it and I think it'd be fair to say what has evolved is both fascinating.
Yeah.
From a policy perspective in terms of what is now called the open method of coordination and which gets us back to the original proposal of multi level governance in a European context, which means on the one hand uh. The principle of subsidiarity and we which is really strong, meaning what can be achieved as the lowest level of government should be achieved at the lowest level of government and only what cannot be should be in the realm of the national supranational bodies, including the EU and and of course, there's not quite equate to the common perception of Europe as a policy entity, which really is about much is done by Brussels and then the states will follow not right and certainly not in the area of higher education?
Which always was defined as being part of national governments and not of the European Union.
I'll come back to that in a second because it's really important for the dynamics of how multilevel governance is played out in Europe and across Europe.
And but it is important to note that Bologna really was a voluntary process.
That all national governments engaged in with open eyes, eyes wide open, and had a massive impact on the way our programs and are highly occasion systems were structured.
This is not to say that every bachelor is the Bachelor, and every master is a master, and every doctoral program is a doctoral program.
Because it's not, and it was always the flexibility for countries to deviate from that.
So we currently have three year bachelors, four year bachelors, one year Masters, 2 year Masters, 2 year Doctorates, 3 year Doctorates, 4 year Doctorates.
So that notion of everything is the same.
No, not at all.
That's not how Europe operates.
And it's not how multi level governance in Europe works, but what did work was a massive process of change over, if I'll be fair to say, probably a 10 year period, we just run through what at that time in the early 2000s was introduced as the open method of coordination and the the way in which Europe try to makes sense of what it was doing and how institutions and countries respond to that.
And in my view is always has been naming and shaming.
So whilst there wasn't a policy prerogative or a policy and good at the European level, there was this process whereby, on an annual basis, measurement was taking off.
How Bologna moved along?
How it was given substance at the national level and these reports were made public.
And it was like, ah, ****, the Netherlands isn't really doing it's it's job because it's only made, you know, almost artificial guts in their program structures.
And that was reported publicly, meaning that the Dutch Minister of Education had to come first to the Dutch parliament, explaining why it got only a four in the in his report, rather than a 10.
And then subsequently the there's people in the European Parliament and people who are responsible at the European governance level at to explain why the hell this was the case and this went on and on and that naming and shaming was actually quite effective in pushing national governments to do things that maybe they hadn't quite understood.
Maybe they weren't completely happy with, but that were the reality of how policy was formulated.
So it was in a way policy by the slight, if you understand my meaning, very subtle, very powerful ways of moving things across.
So there was one side of the story.
The second side of the story, obviously is about money, and again from a multi level governance perspective, Europe had this massive framework program which we're talking about close to at the moment, €100 billion, which is a massively powerful incentive for higher education.
So individual researchers and countries are.
Uh.
Asked to apply for research projects that fit the innovation and research agenda of the European Union, this has nothing to do with National Research programs.
This is something entirely out of the realm of individual countries.
It's an agreed upon framework program that countries have signed off on, but I can tell you from very practical experience that it is incredibly, uh, interesting for individual researchers and research groups in universities to apply for that bidder and the money pie, which is additional to what national governments put in to research as such.
And doing this is completely not understandable from me.
Australian perspective did something entirely out of that, but when you are in a policy position at the university, it becomes quite challenging because it's all about not only getting the grounds from Europe, it is then the requirement that an institution matches it 5050.
So we had some really fascinatingly good research groups.
Uh.
In nanotechnology, said it extremely well in the European Uh Challenge.
4 research funds and if there were allowed to go on would have taken up all of the universities.
Research budget.
Because of the commitment made at the supranational level that if you get a ground from Europe, it will be much 5050 at the local level.
So just just trying trying to to explain a little bit how Europe without setting real parameters.
Riccardo Armillei 19:49
Yeah, the umbrella.
Will you?
Will need it.
Sorry, can say it again.
Leo Goedegebuure 19:53
Moving.
Riccardo Armillei 19:54
They have been you wrap up please. Yes.
Leo Goedegebuure 19:56
Yeah, I am.
I am wrapping up move, moving policy agendas forward without a formal policy imperative with with a huge practical impact on national levels, which I think is not what we are quite used to in Australia, even though we have a tensions between federal and state that it is much more over a I sort of an unwritten dynamic in Europe that I find.
Extremely fascinating.
But it's also extremely effective, I think, and that's where I live.
Riccardo Armillei 20:44
Is it OK?
Thanks, Leo.
That you really opened up a quite a number of questions which hopefully in our conversation instructions will we'll take up further.
Let's go to our second speaker, Doctor Lukas Graf, who is the head of the Swiss Observatory for the Federal Education and training at the Swiss Federal University for Vocational Education Training.
His interests and research interests are in the areas of contemporary challenges and developments related to education, training, lifelong learning, social inequality and policy reform of the graph has worked across Europe and, Prior to joining the previous organization I mentioned, he led the educational governance team at Hertie school, the University of Governance in Berlin.
Welcome Lukas Groff over to you, 15 minutes.
Graf Lukas 21:37
Thank you very much for the kind invitation.
I'm very happy to present here today about dual study programs.
I'm trying to share my screen.
Is that working?
Yeah, good.
Fantastic.
Yes.
So, umm, actually, uh, I will try to build also bridge to what we just heard about Europeanization and higher education.
And so the dual study programs are relatively recent phenomenon in Germany, they have been launched in the late 1960s, early 1970s and when the Bologna process was started and the bachelor and master programs were introduced in Germany, which previously did not exist.
And it was actually facilitating and the launch or or the further expansion of dual study programs because the bachelor programs in a way they to some extent had this employability focus also and that was going hand in hand with sort of say this idea of dual study programs.
And I hope that will become clearer as I as I move on and OK. So I want to talk about these dual study programs and I wanna embed this that discussion in a theoretical framework and that is collective skill formation and and uh. Give me a second and and that is can you see the second slide now? I'm just not yet there we go now it works right second slide good and so basically this theoretical framework is collective skill formation and it has been quite prominent in recent years and the discussion around skill formation, education and training in countries like Germany, but also Switzerland, Austria.
To some extent, Denmark, even to some extent the Netherlands and these are countries that are known for their tradition and vocational education and training, and which is quite strong and which is linked to this concept of apprenticeship training or dual training.
And so let me and that's also the kind of the empirical focus I will have.
We'll talk about vocational training and then how it is linked increasingly to higher education in the form of dual study programs.
O how can we define collective skill formation then?
Bozeman and Trampusch have defined it in the following way.
The main characteristics of vocational training systems of these countries, such as Germany, Austria, Switzerland is that there are collectively organized because firms, intermediary associations and the state cooperate in the process of skill formation.
Initial vocational training.
OK, so let's try to get more concrete and let's look at the case of apprenticeship training or do a training and that is the core empirical case for collective skill formation in these countries and in Germany.
So what we have here is that we have training that is carried out in the vocational school and in the workplace, and so there is an iteration between these two locations of learning and the collective element is that we have multiple public and private actors involved in the governance of this type of dual training.
So we have firms and that offer the training in the workplace.
We have employer associations that organise firms and that also are engaged in establishing standards for dual training and so on.
We have trained unions that are involved in the governance and then we have the state, but the state is rather providing an umbrella for the social partners, for the employer side and for the trade union side to actually govern as much as possible on their own.
So we could even talk about a quasi public government.
So the state delegates the authority for the governance, the steering of the dual training, the development of new training programs, the changes in curricula it to get delegates that as much as possible to these actors.
The so you could call them private actors, namely the employers and the unions, and and that is sort of, say, a fragile balance and in a sense that the firms and the unions, they are more or less and represented in equal form in the respective boards that take these decisions.
And and now that is.
Then, roughly speaking, maybe the characteristic of collective skill formation in the traditional sense, when we talk about dual training or apprenticeship training at the secondary level of the education system.
Now I want to move on and talk about dual study programs and that is this newer way of offering dual training.
But now dual training is offered at the tertiary level at the higher education level in the form of dual study programs.
So we now have replaced, I mean the old model still exists, right?
But we have now this new model.
In addition, these dual study programs and now the vocational school in this newer model, it has been replaced by university.
So what we can see is that firms still are key players when it comes to the governance of dual study programs.
They still offer the workplace part of the training, but now we see that unions actually are further detached in the governance of dual study programs.
Unions in the German context, there are very strong when it comes to traditional dual training apprenticeship training at the secondary level.
They are actually not very strongly represented in higher education, so unions kind of get a little bit out of the picture and interestingly also the state is to some extent further detached from that mode of governance for dual study programs and that is largely related to the situation that the universities in Germany, they enjoy quite a significant degree of autonomy from state regulation.
So the state grants?
Yeah, quite some autonomy to universities to regulate their own affairs.
So we are still having a system now which is composed of multiple actors, but we see that the configuration has changed and we also see maybe one more interesting hopefully interesting aspect that firms are now represented in the system more directly in a sense that the employee associations are no longer as much uh, yeah, playing not so much of a role and and employ associations actually and could play a key role in making such a governance system, so to say slightly more democratic because employers associations, they would bundle individual firms and kind of in bundling them and representing firms like in combination that say they also avoid to some extent that individual firms maybe push too much for their own interests in terms of or maybe certain specific skills that should be offered in a specific dual study program.
So if these do these kind of chambers and yeah, employ associations get out of the picture, then it also means that there is some element of balancing that is no longer as much present.
And in addition to that, the balancing of the interests of individual firms through unions is also no longer as much present.
So we see that there's a slight shift in this configuration in the governance of dual study programs as compared to the traditional collective governance at the yeah, dual training or friendship training at the secondary level. OK.
And now what we have we have around 120,000 students in dual study programs and that is actually quite a lot if you consider that dual study programs are not offered in all subject areas, but they are mainly offered in subject areas that are closer to the world of work.
So engineering natural sciences business studies and then in if you take those subject errors then they're already play a significant role in Germany.
And let me also note that one key driver for for actually firms were the key change agents pushing for the rise of these dual study programs that they were trying to tackle a challenge.
And that was the challenge.
Or is the challenge of Academisation so firms wanted to see more general education, more academic elements of education in dual training, and that was difficult to introduce in dual training at the secondary level.
But it's easier to introduce that if you cooperate with university so academisation and economic accommodating like this push for academisation was one of the main drivers.
OK, what I want to do in the next step is quickly outline again how these two different configurations compare and then try to explain shortly how this emergence of dual study programs actually, yeah was unfolding and was possible.
So what you can see here is a comparison of the old configuration where you see that basically the firms and had quite a strong influence and vocational education training.
Traditionally, but high education was not so much an area where firms had a lot, so to say to say, and that was sometimes or is sometimes referred to as the educational schism.
So we have one world of education, which is the one in which is what vocational training and which friends play a key role.
It's close to the world of work and we had this other world of education or still have to some extent, of course, which is mainly a yeah, about general education.
It's kind of detached from from the world of work, from influence of employers, and in this new configuration, in the case of dual study programs, we actually see that to some extent, firms increasingly also play a role in higher education.
And then the question kind of is, how could this situation, this new configuration emerge?
How could these hybrid dual study programs that combine elements of occasional training and higher education actually emerge?
And how was that possible despite actually quite strong past dependencies in the German education system overall?
And this actually traditional division schism between vocational training and higher education.
And what is the impact then of this development?
And I'm not going to go into details about theory and methods, but I'm relying here on historical institutionalism and the theory of gravity sort of change based on interviews, document analysis, and systematic process tracing.
A quick word on this theory of granulation change that it will use now to try to explain how dual study programs could emerge in a past dependent context, and in that theory we have on the one hand the characteristics of the political context and on the other hand, we have the characteristics of the targeted institution and we are looking at this from the point of view that, OK, the key changer engines that want to see a change are firms and how can they achieve change despite strong past dependencies and then the characteristics of the political context can be further specified in the sense that either the better possibilities of opponents to such a change can be strong or weak and the other dimension is characteristics of the targeted institution where the discretion for the creative interpretation of the given the traditional rules is either low or high.
And in that theory, then you can in this two by two table you can raise expectations of about different modes of gradual change that can still be possible in past dependent context.
I will, in the interest of time.
Riccardo Armillei 33:55
You close, close, close your presentation.
Lucas, please.
Graf Lukas 33:58
Yes.
OK, so we can basically see that there are four types of gradual institutional change and that one is layering and that is basically about a situation where you have strong weight opacities or you have a low level of discretion and interpretation.
And if that's the case in combination, then change agents would probably push for a form of change which is called layering.
So they would not carry out changes directly in the traditional system of dual training of dual apprenticeship training.
But what they did is they established basically these dual study programs on top of the traditional dual training system, the traditional dual study programs and and how that happened.
I will.
Yeah, I I was basically planning with 20 minutes.
That was the information I had, but I will try to to wrap it up and and move to then more the presentation of how this worked out in a sense that basically we see that we do study programs where emerging through firms pushing for a change in the form of layering.
So they built a dual study programs on top of traditional dual training and and they created them in a grey zone between vocational training and higher education as a layer.
And then what happened in the next step was next or after layering was a conversion process, which happened then in the context of higher education, where the video possibilities of unions are weaker, where there's a higher level of discretion, there's more room for experimentation in the multilevel system of governance.
Matt Harvey joined the meeting
Graf Lukas 35:45
And there it was possible to firms to actually convert a part of the higher education system and towards these dual study programs.
So we see a process from layering to conversion that can explain the rise of dual study programs in the this kind of past dependent multi level multi actor context that has quite some consequences in the sense that the degree of standardization in dual training is declining.
We see much more kind of watermark processes that really lead to different ways of how to study programs can look in different localities in different States and Germany that can decrease kind of the transparency for students, but it also leads to this higher degree of innovation.
We see that there are multiple actors and still involved, but that there's a higher level of differentiation.
So you get more actors or you get more actors involved in higher education, but you lose somehow something with regard to the degree of standardization.
And I will conclude with saying that in this new form of dual training at the higher education level. It now is crucial that or it seems that the actor who can balance the interests. And who can ensure that differentiation does not become too. So to say large and that is probably universities and they can now be the key players that kind of take up the role that in the traditional tool training.
The unions were playing, or the state was playing in balancing the interests that firms have when it comes through training, so that is currently something which, yeah, which is, I think, probably a task for policy actors to ensure that universities can balance those interests within this dual study model.
Thank you for your attention.
Riccardo Armillei 37:36
Lucas and uh, thank you.
It also to Leo, two very complimentary presentations which you'll give us quite a bit of meat who discuss to those of you who are following us virtually please if you have any questions, put them on chat or make yourself known.
YE,Michael left the meeting
Riccardo Armillei 37:56
First question, I'd like to go to is from colleague Maren Klein, who has done some work.
Besides being German has done quite a lot of work on this and Marina, I'll leave it over to you for your question.
Maren Klein 38:14
Or but so my first question, which is mostly or focuses more on Bologna, but could also.
Be a question for the dual study programs.
Given the voluntary nature of the implementation of the Bologna press process and the legislative limitations of the EU, and the fact that implementation has been reportedly very uneven, and as Leo pointed out, but there are totally different.
Graf Lukas 38:31
Umm.
Maren Klein 38:49
Umm.
Gosia Klatt left the meeting
Maren Klein 38:52
Which law degrees masters degrees?
Hence her on and it seems that some countries feel they are free to pick and choose which of the commitments they are prepared to work towards.
So would you consider that this is an indication that multi level governance requires firm structures monitoring and possibly holding people to account through sanctions or something?
And if that is so, is there a level of on number of actors that seems particularly suited to coordination?
Because it's a coordination question, isn't it?
Riccardo Armillei 39:43
Leo.
He's almost your mural.
Nuclear.
Yes, Leo, you're on mute.
Leo Goedegebuure 39:52
Sorry.
Yep.
Then I'm flying away.
It is a coordination question, but it's also one of out.
I'm sorry.
Uh, probably.
Policy settings I think, and I don't I don't think and it is anything to do with, you know, sitting rigid rules when you're dealing with Thursday.
I think Lucas is presentation is really spot on.
When when you talk about different actors moving along a line of different interests but but finding new grounds, because I think that that's a really good example of of a the German dual programs where you see different access emerging in in different constellations.
So it's it's the flexibility that that plays a crucial role.
And of course, that is behind the whole concept of multi level governance where it's not about hierarchy, it's it is about gold, the nation cooperation in a let's school it ideal state which which we of course never have.
So that there's always tensions between actors and and all of that stuff.
But but ultimately it is not about the one actor saying and thou shall do this, and therefore this will happen.
It is about the dynamics of processes that evolve over time, and in bulla bulla is a classic example in that that it has achieved a lot but it is nowhere near what some people thought it would be like.
OK.
And we have exactly the same structure across the whole of the 24 European countries or the whatever 39 signatories to belonio or whatever it is at.
That's not the way it works.
It is context dependent.
It is actually dependent and I think that is the crucial part when we talk about multilevel governance, that there is no such thing as a set vertical hierarchical approach to governance and coordination.
It is give and take and it is context dependent and I think Lucas gave very, very good example of that where when he showed the, you know the the slide with the two different modes of uh wheels interacting or not interacting and and I think that's exactly what it's about.
Riccardo Armillei 42:48
Thank you.
Thank you for that, Leo.
OK I have done.
We can move to the next question from Irini.
Thank you.
So Leo, this is touching on a bit of what you said about the Bologna process.
And Doctor Graff, feel free to jump in and answer this as well, but one of the things we're looking at in this multilevel governance project is also the democratic deficit and how basically citizens are left out of a lot of these processes, particularly that the EU tends to sort of from the top down.
So I'm curious to know, given the disparity that the Bologna process, you know, the way it's played out, states have adopted some things and not others, because that actually created a disparity in access to education from the people in different states.
Or do you think it's overall been an improvement?
If you can discuss that a bit more.
Leo Goedegebuure 43:36
Yeah.
Thanks, Jerry.
I mean, I I don't think it's it's a deficit approach.
I think what would Bologna show?
And I mean, there are probably 102 and 150 BSE thesis about all of this.
Uh.
Is is that it has been a movable feast, but it hasn't excluded countries.
It hasn't excluded actors and it has not being a top down approach, but it has been one where in initial phases the naming and shaming that I mentioned earlier has been going on to quite a bit and not always for the positive and not always for the good reasons, but that has changed over time into something that's become much more of peer learning and information exchange and transparency.
And obviously we have to include, you know, the European Credit transfer system, the emergence of coordination between quality assurance agencies and the like.
So I think it's actually been a remarkably inclusive process rather than one that has been exclusive, exclusionary and so overall and obviously we would still need time to come to that conclusion.
Uh.
In a substantive matter.
But I I would think it is been actually an example of quite a democratic process whereby people have been allowed to move in their particular direction given their particular circumstances, without having an overarching uh model.
That endow shell degree to this, I think that has not been a change.
That has not been the case.
And therefore I think it has been, uh, inclusive run an exclusive, but Lukas may may have different views on that.
Graf Lukas 45:58
And may I add something?
Riccardo Armillei 45:58
Fresh please please.
Graf Lukas 46:00
Yeah, OK.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Thank you.
Very interesting discussion and what comes to my mind is the example of the European Alliance for Apprenticeship Training.
So that's the European level policy to support a friendship training throughout Europe and what it but it, I would say basically does is that it creates an intermediary platform for actors from all the Member States that are involved in vocational education and training to to join and to discuss new policies, to develop pilot programs.
And yeah, it brings me to this.
Maybe idea that in this highly diverse, complex European landscape with all these different national educational systems and the the there's a yeah, yeah.
Focus on creating these intermediary platforms where the actors can exchange ideas and to develop new projects, and that is in a way a very soft mode of governance.
And I think to some extent, the European Commission is forced to make use of such instruments that are rather soft, because in education they don't really have the authority because the authorities still lies with the nation states within the European Union and and so, in a sense, I think there is a huge benefit of these intermediary platforms, such as the European Alliance print apprenticeship trend for all the actors to are not all but many actors to come together and to exchange ideas and at the same time, I think there's a potentially also risk and that's related to democratic representation because now the question is also who in fact joins these intermediary platforms?
Who gets invited or who has the capacity to travel to Brussels for such an event?
And so that's maybe the risk risky side related to this soft mode of governance.
These who actually.
Takes part in this, and who knows about this?
Yeah, maybe just as one addition.
Riccardo Armillei 48:09
Thank you.
Thank you for that, Lukas.
We have a question on the chat.
So could you please read it out on one of your family lingual twice a couple of question.
Ellen, could you please ask your questions?
elaine_butler@optusnet.com.au 48:27
Oh, hi.
I've just popped to the first one into the chat and thank you very much for letting me sit in.
The first one was is in chat and it's really about umm uh.
The and I I have have some knowledge of the German dual system and some knowledge of the European system, but not comprehensively.
But I'm wondering for the conto actually content of the courses.
How are you keeping up?
Given the rapid rate of changes going on in the nature of work in labor markets, particularly getting driven by things like clean energy, the rise of AI and also the push for a lot of employers to want to do a lot of that training, the training of their technical skills on the ground and wanting their employees to be able to do mainly focus on critical thinking and evaluation etcetera, that was the first question.
How how are you keeping up with the pace in terms of content?
Riccardo Armillei 49:36
But anyway, our speakers like to address that.
Graf Lukas 49:40
Umm.
Leo Goedegebuure 49:42
Look at you are first.
Graf Lukas 49:44
OK.
And yeah, great question.
I will try to link it to the case of dual study programs and and OK.
I tried to make a point earlier that in the traditional version of collective skill formation, that was kind of a balanced system of different private actors and public actors, kind of.
Negotiating about how content for training should change, for example, and the interests of employers and of unions should should somehow balance, and that system has has many advantages, but then for example, if certain large firms in Germany, they really want to see that young people gain certain skills related to, I don't know, AI or something more academic, let's say.
Then in that traditional mode, it can be a bit difficult to implement that in a fast way.
It's rather rigid because you have these negotiation processes and all of that and and that is you know the if there's time for negotiation then the balancing out can take place.
Maybe the outcome overall is a is a a relatively standardized training programs and that has many advantages.
But if, for example, large firms see the need to push for more specific skills that they need related to new technologies or so on, then that is maybe one of the reasons why dual study programs are an attractive alternative for them, because now they can relatively directly get engaged with the university to develop more specific training programs, tool study programs.
And that isn't a way of one response to how you can address these these challenges, but the the risk of it is that you kind of lose the strength of the kind of overall system where you would then take on board also smaller employers and so on.
Yeah.
So there are pros and cons here, but maybe I I hand over to Leo now for his thoughts.
Leo Goedegebuure 51:53
That would mean you might really good point there about flexibility and adaptation, I think.
And we the world around us, is changing very quickly and and we know that the need for institutions to respond to that. It's huge.
Uh, I'm now answering.
There's no from the.
From the Dutch perspective from my but from my experience in Australia, where we don't have the Council of jewel programs like you have where we've got 2 separate sectors for vocational education and higher education and the mantra.
Of course, now is for higher education to create work ready graduates and for vocational education to be on the ball and actually make sure that, yeah, these are the people that industry needs, which to me is, uh, I shall put politely.
It is not very constructive and because Umm in order to change programs in vocational education. We have to deal with the structure.
That is completely antithetical to change based on, uh, essentially study profiles and program profiles that that takes ages to change, which is hopeless.
And for higher education is trying to occupy something, uh, moving downwards a bit.
But but trying to capture what was part of vocational education, which also very unhelpful, so in the way of the dual study programs that you mention.
Uh Lucas?
It is far more of anything integrated approach which I think is what we need and because we need to.
Upgrade vocational education to incorporate elements of higher education, and that is pretty damn difficult in Australian context, both for legislative reasons and four.
Uh, let's say historical reasons like conceptual reasons of people involved in in both sectors and but but that to me, is where the future lies in that intersection between vocational and higher rate, where we start upgrading vocational to mean a better understanding of, you know, the conceptual issues.
Uh.
The theory, and it's not only about practice, because as we've always sent the most practical thing is a good theory and that that part is lacking in the substantial area of occasional education in Australia.
So I think the examples you've shown Lucas, I sort of the way forward for our to a 3 slash secondary or tertiary slash vocational education sector dealing with the real challenges of how quickly uh, the world changes around us and how quickly we need to change the focus in some of our education programs.
Also, in some of our research programs, but also how we should combine practical research implicational education with the impact that that would have on the educational programs.
And I know I'm sort of out of line with all the the regular Australian policies and and structures, but that is how I see it playing out.
Riccardo Armillei 55:48
Thank you, Leo.
We've got two more questions.
Elaine has the second question and then we're going to Pam plan.
Would you like to read your question please?
elaine_butler@optusnet.com.au 55:59
OK.
Thank you and thank you for those answers.
I think policy in Australia is changing so fast.
Anything is probably almost possible.
The second question I had was about inclusivity.
I'm wondering how it's understood and how it relates to equity and what steps are taken to include a X equity experts when I know I couldn't see where they fitted into the diagrams that were shown and what we're finding out here is that expertise is that on the ground.
Particularly, and also the voices of marginalized and and or vulnerable groups via access and equitable outcomes.
And this includes also looking at a highly segregated industries occupations and the impact that that has on labor markets.
Graf Lukas 56:54
Umm.
Riccardo Armillei 57:00
Please feel free.
Graf Lukas 57:00
And I, yeah, I could say something about the case of dual study programs and so OK and I I tried to, I tried to paint the picture in a sense that, yeah, we have now this additional strand of of of hybrid dual training in the form of dual study programs located somewhere at the Nexus between vocational training and traditional high education.
And I think when it comes to questions of access and equity, the dual study programs are you get kind of a not so trivial, you get to not so trivial picture and so on the one hand do a study programs, they can enhance access in a sense that and it is an attractive training program for young people that would for example hesitate or whose families would hesitate to pay tuition, tuition fees that say that are charged for universities and other countries that say.
And so if you do study program, you basically get a salary from the firm that you do the training with and the German context, they are not really tuition fees that public universities.
But even then, it's attractive for young people from families where financial the functional situation.
Maybe it's a bit challenging because if these people then do study programs, they can more or less finance their own studies and even have a little bit of a plus.
And so that in a way is can enhance access to higher education.
And on and also it enhanced access to higher education in the sense that it is a non stigmatized form of higher vocational training.
So it's associated with higher education and and in a way then that makes it attractive option for people who would somehow hesitate to enter traditional universities in Germany, which is a bit elitist and so on.
And there are some are motivated by a training program that it's more hands on and but that is more yet is more practical.
And yeah, you kind of gain a new target group for higher education.
Those people who would traditionally go into vocational training at the secondary level, who might think about going into high education, would not do it because the traditional university program would be too detached from them in a way, and do a study programs now offer some interesting option in between.
OK.
But in terms of and the negative side maybe and now with dual study programs, you have a very strong role for the firms in terms of deciding who gets access to study programs at universities.
Because in the end, the firm recruits you for dual study program and that is a new element then in Gem high education where in higher education in the traditional sense and you basically apply to the university and either you meet the criteria or not.
And but now the firm also has something to say, and that can also in yeah, introduce certain elements of inequality.
And but it's a complex picture.
OK.
Yeah, maybe.
Leo, you have some thoughts as well.
Leo Goedegebuure 1:00:27
Ah, that would mean it is a complex picture and it is very complex question as well.
Uh, but.
But I think if you look at it over time, what has happened in many of the developed countries, I'm not talking about developing countries talking about developed countries.
The in equity that used to be part and parcel of higher education has changed.
I mean, we've seen a large influx of first in family.
Who would enter ireducation or higher vocational education?
And I think that's a major achievement of our systems.
I'm not saying that it's it's perfect or it's ideal and and still of course there are many examples of people who are facing real hurdles and challenges, challenges to to to enter.
He came to A to a tree or higher vocational education, but nevertheless we've made great progress and I think that should not be underestimated.
Uh.
Secondly, I think the examples that Lucas gave uh are way forwards where you have a greater role.
For industry in terms of program content, maybe even program design where it is a partnership rather than a service for free and the service delivery model.
And I think that partnership model is something that is crucially important, especially in giving our original discussion on multilevel governance and the inclusion of different actors in decision making processes.
Hey, this is not something that will come easy.
That because I mean have any discussion in an Australian university at academic board and saying that industry should have a better say at how curriculum is structured and you'll be.
Uh, sensually pinned to the wall and have spikes in your hands and all that.
Sort of shut, because that's not the way this is being seen.
That's is the exclusive exclusive won't end any exclusive domain of higher education.
And the thing with Lucas has given us examples where you have this partnership between industry and education is is a crucial way forward of dealing with the dynamics of changes in society, dealing with it.
Of changing changes.
In our content fields of study and content fields of research and the fluidity of the boundaries between sectors, I think it is one that becomes one of permeability that is the real and excitement of the years to come where we do get into this amorphous system of coordination and the dual system that that Lucas has highlighted I think is is a very nice example of where we might be heading away from our traditional sort of close boundaries.
Between sectors, between institutions, between education and industry, and to me, that is where the real excitement lies.
Riccardo Armillei 1:04:23
Things little things, Lucas.
Also my I still have some concerns anyway for those kids who can and basically pay their fees or those who are disadvantaged, they can also afford to get into universities.
And our case I guess is, is is a perfect example or United States or whatever in Europe Day see is like you know he's of the position on that.
But anyway, so this is just a, you know, provocative question side, but Pam has a question, Pam over to you please.
Pam Jonas 1:05:01
Yes, thank you very much, Sir.
Pam Jonas and I'm.
I'm the senior advisor with the Victorian Taffer Society.
Riccardo Armillei 1:05:07
Sorry, Pam.
I drop them off.
We cannot hear very well with the microphone.
Maybe put it closer to your yeah.
You know you learn mutant.
Pam Jonas 1:05:21
Good.
OK, that's the the machine is too sensitive.
Riccardo Armillei 1:05:24
Emma.
Pam Jonas 1:05:27
And Yep, so yeah, I work with the Victorian Type Association and we're the peak body for Victorian types, which are vet vet institutions and the dual sector universities in Victoria in E.
Australia.
So I guess my my question.
Firstly, Leo, I agree with everything you've you've said.
It certainly describes the situation we have and I my question really is how do VET providers, TAFE institutes insert themselves and assert themselves into the multi?
Governance model.
As Leo says, Australia has our experience is that vets always been an inferior position to unis or universities and always in danger of marginalization.
In policy developments, we see some hope, and in the the the current higher education accord process that's occurring in in Australia at a national level and where they're actively discussing or one, two or three model of bringing the two sectors closer together.
But there's no certainty in the governance, or of or equal status.
A vet in that process, we have dual sector universities but and they don't quote me here, but they don't work very well.
They're still very siloed in their approach and and so it's it's it's a difficult situation that vocational education providers, in particular the TAFE institutes, find themselves in terms of change.
Leo Goedegebuure 1:07:03
Yeah, I E.
Pam Jonas 1:07:17
So I guess I reiterate my question, how to vet providers insert themselves and assert themselves into a multi governance model?
Leo Goedegebuure 1:07:29
I'll look, Ben.
It is a really difficult question and it's partly.
Complicated by history, but, but let's take the Victorian case as a case in point, where we still have not a statewide system, but we have individual institutions that operate in certain regional areas a rather than in the other states where you've booked A1 state fits all model, which I think is horrible.
Uh, so I'm still very much in favor of the Victorian mobile and it's partly because of the work we've been doing across Gippsland in terms of innovation and the role of tape in the regional areas of Victoria and enough Australia for that matter.
I mean we we do have a very strange country and and we need to recognize that we've got a huge, huge length.
Uh.
In terms of geography, we've got very small populations in small areas.
But it doesn't make any sense for people leaving regional Australia to go to Melbourne or to go to Sydney or to go to Brisbane or whatever in order to get decent to a tree or formational education.
It ought to be provided in regions, and that comes at a cost.
It is as simple as that.
If we if we continue on the way that we've been doing with Turkey education and vocational education, needing to be, uh profit oriented businesses and I put it very bluntly, we are not on the right track.
We are talking about public organizations that serve public goods, and I think Lucas also mentioned the notion about public good earlier on, and that comes at an investment cost and that investment goals is not lost money.
It actually is very well spent money to ensure that our.
More remote regions are well serviced by vocational and tertiary education, and hopefully the combination of both of them and that is not happening as you say, Pam through dual sector universities, because that's not what they're focusing on.
And when I've now seen it in in play for the last five years and I'm not very, uh, let's say please bavar seen playing out.
I mean, it can be much, much better at relatively modest course if we if we think of as this as as service sector as a public service sector and not so much as a for profit type of organization.
And I know that is not the full answer to your question, but I mean it's it's a very damn complex question.
In the first place, and we haven't been very good at dealing with it at.
I mean, Lucas can answer this as well because he made the point about, you know, free education mean essentially, of course, free education doesn't exist.
Someone has to pay for it and it's always the and the taxpayer who pays for it.
The question is OK, how much tax money do we want to divert to education and to make it so called free?
And because we we talk about free vocational education in Dave, in Victoria, obviously it's not free, someone has to pay for it.
So how do we find that balance?
And that's where sort of the the political interactions and the multi level governance question comes in.
Again, who's paying?
What slices of the pie and and what is industry paying?
Which is an interesting question.
Of course, when he's not talking about dual sector programs.
So back to you, Lukas.
Graf Lukas 1:12:01
Ah, thank you.
Yeah, super interesting points.
And maybe I I try to come back again to the school to study programs as the as the empirical example or case.
And so I've talked about to study programs as mainly now involving university and firms, and it can take quite different forms depending on how that these two actors kind of set up to dual study programs.
And there's also another version of dual study programs in Germany.
And there you actually get that two qualifications.
So you would for example, not only get the bachelor's degree, but you would also gain the certificate you would traditionally get through vocational training at the secondary level.
Leo Goedegebuure 1:12:40
No.
Graf Lukas 1:12:44
And in that sense, it's not only do studies, but also two qualifications program.
It's carried out still within the three years and the advantage of that in with regard to your question is that through these this tool qualification model, the V actors and their governance system kind of comes on board and it's in a way integrated because then you, you you have in Germany that would be then these chambers and employ associations and so on.
That would then, in this model of dual study, somehow have some say when it comes to how to study programs.
Would evolve just as an idea and in in terms of how how you can sort of say think about getting the V governance structure and actors more integrated in such a tool studies model, no.
Riccardo Armillei 1:13:42
Thanks Lucas.
Thanks to both of you Luke, Jason Collins from Elaine further comment.
If you can't see them, I'm very heavy to to, to read it out.
Thanks for the comment.
Now, yeah, I just want to conclude quickly with them.
Very good point.
Thank you for asking that and we'll make it easy in Australia up until 2009, if you will remember.
We only had one federal regulator and then we split it.
That so now we've got two, we've got one for tape.
Got another one for higher education and they are secret talks, I guess.
Now I'm hearing in the background it can be, you know, ask them takes up a can be together, you know again working in the same office and it will be interesting you know.
So just where's that space now?
We do have another question here in the room from Irini.
Please feel free, just a quick one for Lucas.
Following up on the dual study system, if you can put that in a wider context with other systems within EU States and whether it's a model other states look to emulate and how sort of if you have any feedback on how it compares to other systems, you're required.
Graf Lukas 1:14:59
OK, so comparison with other nation states, so to say, other countries.
Leo Goedegebuure 1:15:03
Yep.
Graf Lukas 1:15:04
UM, yeah.
OK, it's I like that question and and so it's I I described the evolution and expansion of dual study programs as a rather recent phenomenon in in Germany and where it's becoming more and more popular.
And interestingly, my perception is that in some other countries, actually some forms of work based higher education have been around for a longer time.
So if you take the example of France, there are alter norms, study programs where basically you see also some combination of training the workplace and studying at the university and you have in in the US you have the COOP study programs that do something similar.
And sorry I'm I'm not very familiar with the Australian case, so I can't speak about that and So what I wanna say is that countries that some countries that did not have this do not have this long tradition of dual training apprenticeship training at the secondary level.
I think for them and some university business Corporation has started already sooner to some extent and and it so to some extent I would say there is a convergence going on in terms of dual study programs being closer to some forms of work based tile location that already exist for a longer time in some other countries.
And for me that I mean just to add to that to that sort of say story, I want to try to tell and it it also makes sense because the the traditional dual training of our apprenticeship training system at the secondary level, it is built on this collective governance system.
This balanced way of social partners interacting with each other and France or the US.
The examples I've mentioned that they do not have that tradition in the same way.
So for them, moving to work based high education, that is a bit less demanding in terms of all these actors finding a collective balance way of interacting.
I mean, it's it.
It's kind of it kind of makes sense that they have have that and and that it's more difficult for example for France or the US to develop this dual training apprenticeship training at a secondary level that builds on that strong tradition of collective governance that I tried to outline, so.
And yeah, I hope that somehow, uh, addresses your question.
Riccardo Armillei 1:17:38
Yep.
Great.
Thank you.
Not OK.
Thank you, maren.
If you don't have anything Maren is typing, I can see.
OK, so the last point is minus questions.
So what happens in partnerships have been mentioned the number of times as they engagement strategies that work particularly well, that's a question for both of you.
Graf Lukas 1:18:08
Umm.
Riccardo Armillei 1:18:11
Are they engagement strategies that work particularly well that we may draw, you know, some lessons from them?
Leo Goedegebuure 1:18:22
Well, I think so.
Wait, I think that there's ample evidence and in a variety of countries, and that goes beyond just merely Germany or Australia, that partnerships and collective governance, as Lucas said, all the ways forward, it is not always in the genes of our systems or in the genes of our people to do that.
But I think if we've learned anything from the innovation processes that we've been working on in terms of smart specialization in in Australia, it is about bringing people together.
Who normally don't sit around the table and Snart understanding that if you actually talk to each other, uh, there's a hell of a lot of common ground that is worth while.
They're discovering that is worthwhile working on, and it it may not always be the easiest of things to do, but in that sense partnerships and partners are the key element to successful progress and innovation, and I think that's that's what we learning by doing certainly over the last couple of years it in Australia and yes, we, we do have all sorts of of different approaches and we got different regulators and all that sort of **** that doesn't really help uh.
But at the end, when you see that people working together and seeing it as a collective problem and a partnership issue, there are very good ways forward and it can be achieved relatively quickly.
And I think that's what we also see in in Europe.
Uh, through again smart specialization, regional development.
Be a learning learning by doing exchanging information as sharing information and actually moving forward.
So yeah, I think part is a partnerships are the way forward and is is I think what what Lucas mentioned as well.
Graf Lukas 1:20:49
Yeah.
Thank.
Thank you very much and I maybe this this is an opportunity for me to to mention the concept of decentralized cooperation in the context of multilevel governance, so.
If we think about collective governance in the example or at the example of tool training, and then this is built on DS Addressed Corporation, so basically actors within regions, states or even smaller units than States and there's cooperation or decentralized cooperation at the regional level, then there is cooperation amongst actors at the level of economic sectors.
And then there is cooperation of actors at the level of the occupations.
And so there's a lot of decent runs, cooperation amongst actors within regions, sectors and occupations.
And then that kind of builds on a kind of associational governance logic that these Actors day organize themselves within their communities, so to say, and that is going back to the example for, yeah, of, for example chambers, employers, associations, even the unions and and then basically you need the state that in that logic, I think you need to state that creates intermediary platforms that facilitates the building of intermediary platforms where these different active groups and their associations can meet.
And at the next level, so to say, take the development of dual training further and and the important part here is that the state in that logic it it it stays in the background, right, it's kind of a very careful in terms of not taking over but rather facilitating like creating regulative structures for these associations to operate well maybe subsidizing these associations to some extent.
But then the state retreats again, right?
Because you kind of want to have the decentralized cooperation system flourish kind of on its own, and that's a very fragile kind of system within a multi level context.
elaine_butler@optusnet.com.au left the meeting
Graf Lukas 1:23:00
And yeah, I think that's part of the traditional kind of success story of dual training in in these countries that have the long tradition of dual training and but it also comes with, you know, it's not own it.
Also, it also comes with some risks and drawbacks, right?
And for example, related to the question, how can such a system adapt to rapid technological change?
And it's you have so many actors involved at so many levels that can then be a slower reaction.
Umm yeah, thanks.
Riccardo Armillei 1:23:34
Thank you so much to to everyone and thanks to our speakers, it has been an awesome session.
We took, you know, with us a lot of points, more questions to be honest.
Then we it's so this is usual, but it has been.
It has been a pleasure to have you both Leo and Lucas on this on channel. And thanks to all of the audience. You know online and here and wherever they hearing us. We are stopping you know this session.
The recording now, and we're going to use that and be in contact with you both Leo and Lucas, as well as updating our web page on the website.
When we, umm, you know in relation to this specific project that we are developing.
Thanks again Lukas.
Have a nice day in Germany and others have a good night in Australia.
OK.
Thank you.
Maren Klein 1:24:32
Thank you very much.
Graf Lukas 1:24:32
Thanks so much.
Thanks everyone, I really enjoyed this.
Maren Klein 1:24:34
Thank you. Goodbye.
Riccardo Armillei 1:24:34
But thank you.
Viv Sercombe 1:24:35
Thank you.
Riccardo Armillei 1:24:35
Bye bye.
Leo Goedegebuure 1:24:35
So you don't thank.
Very much thanks a lot.
Graf Lukas 1:24:36
No OK.
Leo Goedegebuure 1:24:37
Been a pleasure.
Graf Lukas 1:24:38
So thank you.
Riccardo Armillei 1:24:39
Right.
Matt Harvey left the meeting
Viv Sercombe left the meeting
Pam Jonas left the meeting
Riccardo Armillei left the meeting
Leo Goedegebuure left the meeting
Graf Lukas 1:24:44
And thank you both of you.
Maren Klein left the meeting
Graf Lukas 1:24:46
Thank you, maren. Ciao.
Irini Vasilakakos left the meeting
Riccardo Armillei stopped transcription
