非正规和非正规学习验证政策中的非正规学习概念:奥地利和意大利的比较

Philipp Assinger, Chiara Biasin
{"title":"非正规和非正规学习验证政策中的非正规学习概念:奥地利和意大利的比较","authors":"Philipp Assinger,&nbsp;Chiara Biasin","doi":"10.1111/ijtd.12313","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><i>In 2012</i>, European Union Member States committed to implement policies for the <i>Validation of Nonformal and Informal Learning</i> (VNFIL). In this article, we examine Austria and Italy and ask how VNFIL policies in these two countries relate to <i>informal learning</i> (IL) and how this can be interpreted from a <i>workplace learning</i> (WPL) perspective. The notion of IL in VNFIL is largely based on a psychological understanding of learning. We argue that a WPL perspective complements this understanding and serves to better understand learning at work. Based on assumptions concerning the influence of national education and training systems on VNFIL, a comparison is made along three categories: the preferred type of VNFIL, the notion of IL, and the references to workplaces. Despite preferences for summative types of VNFIL, Austria acknowledges a range of types, while Italy is still in the process of development and prefers the so-called autonomous type. Findings suggest a minimalistic understanding of IL in Austria contrasting with Italy, in which IL is seen as firmly embedded within Lifelong Learning. The references to workplaces are weak in both countries. We finally address the role of employers as a delicate issue for VNFIL, when embedded in educational policies.</p>","PeriodicalId":46817,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Training and Development","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The notion of informal learning within policies for the validation of nonformal and informal learning: A comparison between Austria and Italy\",\"authors\":\"Philipp Assinger,&nbsp;Chiara Biasin\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ijtd.12313\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><i>In 2012</i>, European Union Member States committed to implement policies for the <i>Validation of Nonformal and Informal Learning</i> (VNFIL). In this article, we examine Austria and Italy and ask how VNFIL policies in these two countries relate to <i>informal learning</i> (IL) and how this can be interpreted from a <i>workplace learning</i> (WPL) perspective. The notion of IL in VNFIL is largely based on a psychological understanding of learning. We argue that a WPL perspective complements this understanding and serves to better understand learning at work. Based on assumptions concerning the influence of national education and training systems on VNFIL, a comparison is made along three categories: the preferred type of VNFIL, the notion of IL, and the references to workplaces. Despite preferences for summative types of VNFIL, Austria acknowledges a range of types, while Italy is still in the process of development and prefers the so-called autonomous type. Findings suggest a minimalistic understanding of IL in Austria contrasting with Italy, in which IL is seen as firmly embedded within Lifelong Learning. The references to workplaces are weak in both countries. We finally address the role of employers as a delicate issue for VNFIL, when embedded in educational policies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46817,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Training and Development\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Training and Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ijtd.12313\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Training and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ijtd.12313","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2012年,欧洲联盟成员国承诺实施非正规和非正规学习验证政策。在这篇文章中,我们考察了奥地利和意大利,并询问这两个国家的VNFIL政策如何与非正式学习(IL)相关,以及如何从工作场所学习(WPL)的角度来解释这一点。VNFIL中IL的概念很大程度上是基于对学习的心理学理解。我们认为,WPL视角补充了这种理解,有助于更好地理解工作中的学习。基于国家教育和培训系统对VNFIL影响的假设,对三类进行了比较:VNFIL的首选类型、IL的概念和对工作场所的参考。尽管奥地利更喜欢VNFIL的总结型,但它承认有一系列类型,而意大利仍处于发展过程中,更喜欢所谓的自主型。研究结果表明,与意大利相比,奥地利对IL的理解是极简主义的,意大利认为IL牢牢植根于终身学习中。这两个国家对工作场所的提及都很薄弱。最后,我们将雇主的角色作为VNFIL的一个微妙问题,纳入教育政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The notion of informal learning within policies for the validation of nonformal and informal learning: A comparison between Austria and Italy

In 2012, European Union Member States committed to implement policies for the Validation of Nonformal and Informal Learning (VNFIL). In this article, we examine Austria and Italy and ask how VNFIL policies in these two countries relate to informal learning (IL) and how this can be interpreted from a workplace learning (WPL) perspective. The notion of IL in VNFIL is largely based on a psychological understanding of learning. We argue that a WPL perspective complements this understanding and serves to better understand learning at work. Based on assumptions concerning the influence of national education and training systems on VNFIL, a comparison is made along three categories: the preferred type of VNFIL, the notion of IL, and the references to workplaces. Despite preferences for summative types of VNFIL, Austria acknowledges a range of types, while Italy is still in the process of development and prefers the so-called autonomous type. Findings suggest a minimalistic understanding of IL in Austria contrasting with Italy, in which IL is seen as firmly embedded within Lifelong Learning. The references to workplaces are weak in both countries. We finally address the role of employers as a delicate issue for VNFIL, when embedded in educational policies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
11.10%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Increasing international competition has led governments and corporations to focus on ways of improving national and corporate economic performance. The effective use of human resources is seen as a prerequisite, and the training and development of employees as paramount. The growth of training and development as an academic subject reflects its growth in practice. The International Journal of Training and Development is an international forum for the reporting of high-quality, original, empirical research. Multidisciplinary, international and comparative, the journal publishes research which ranges from the theoretical, conceptual and methodological to more policy-oriented types of work. The scope of the Journal is training and development, broadly defined. This includes: The determinants of training specifying and testing the explanatory variables which may be related to training identifying and analysing specific factors which give rise to a need for training and development as well as the processes by which those needs become defined, for example, training needs analysis the need for performance improvement the training and development implications of various performance improvement techniques, such as appraisal and assessment the analysis of competence Training and development practice the design, development and delivery of training the learning and development process itself competency-based approaches evaluation: the relationship between training and individual, corporate and macroeconomic performance Policy and strategy organisational aspects of training and development public policy issues questions of infrastructure issues relating to the training and development profession The Journal’s scope encompasses both corporate and public policy analysis. International and comparative work is particularly welcome, as is research which embraces emerging issues and developments.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information The emergence of training programmes for the garment industry: Analysing the cases of Bangladesh, Cambodia and Sri Lanka from a historical‐institutionalist perspective Measuring the effectiveness of L&D: Time to move on from Kirkpatrick and Phillips? Issue Information The role of participation in training in the relationship between informal learning and its antecedents
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1