| Resum: |
In this chapter, we compare policy designs that have adopted different concepts of (under)achievement and lifelong learning. We focus on the differences between Austria, Finland and Germany, on the one hand, and Italy, Portugal and Spain, on the other. [1] In addition, we explore how prior learning validation schemes define learning outcomes in the latter group. We consider policy design to be a significant process for analysing learning outcomes of young and adult learners who are involved in different kinds of education and training offers. Policy design contributes to 'improving the search for, and generation of, policy alternatives [that] will lead to more effective and successful policies' (Sidney, 2007, p. 80). The prevailing policy design of adult learning in the European Union (EU) draws on benchmarks and indicators (Grek, 2010) as well as on wide negotiation among several policy actors (Milana, 2022). This chapter is based on qualitative research, taking an interpretative approach, as it describes and compares key features of policy design in the selected countries (Boeren, 2018; Egetenmeyer, 2016; Fejes & Nylander, 2015; Lichtman, 2023). A theoretical section posits the key research question and sets the context for analysis of the content (Bowen, 2009) of the official presentation in the EURYDICE database of the lifelong learning policies of Austria, Finland, Germany, Italy, Portugal and Spain. Austria, Finland and Germany have consolidated institutional systems which integrate such validation schemes with vocational education and training (VET) and, in recent decades, Italy, Portugal and Spain have approved laws that attempt to emulate such integration. We 122therefore review the legislation and the literature on learning outcomes and validation of prior learning in Italy, Portugal and Spain. The challenges entailed in this transfer of policy from some member states of the EU to others are, thus, highlighted. |
visitant ::
identificació
