Presentation from SFI VET congress March 2017.

1. Technology-mediated Boundary
Objects and Boundary Crossings
in VET
- an instructional design model
Marianne Riis,
Mette Allermand, Anna Brodersen & Carsten Lund Rasmussen
VET Congress - 14th -16th March 2017 - Bern/Zollikofen, Switzerland

2. Agenda
Why
 Research background
 RQs and research design
What
 Theory
 Proposed instructional design
model
How
 Field validation
Findings
 Model 2.0 + a matrix
Future research

3. Research background - our
context
Danish National Centre for the Development of Vocational
Education and Training
 CPD for VET teachers - Diploma (NQF level 6)
 Applied R&D
 Research on the use of ICT in Danish VET is very limited

 Current research project (2015-2017): “ICT, transfer and
boundary crossing in VET”
 The development of instructional models and materials

4. The challenge in dual VET
VET-students’ experiences
Ortoleva & Bétrancourt (2015)
 Difficulties in integrating formal knowledge and tacit knowledge
Schwendimann et al. (2015)
 Gaps between experiences (e.g. abstraction, skills, culture)
Tanggaard (2007)
 Very dissimilar contexts with different norms and guidelines for
action
Aarkrog (2005)
 VET programs are discontinuous and fragmented

5. Research purpose and RQs
1. In what ways and why do VET teachers use ICT-based
artefacts as boundary objects to design for boundary
crossing and continuity in and across different contexts?
1. What didactic and pedagogic recommendations can
support VET schools' future work with establishing
enhanced school-workplace interaction through the
use of ICT?

VET teacher-students
Research community
Practitioners

6. Research design
 Multiple case study
 Three dominant strands: Technical*, Business and Social & Health
 Numerous schools – teachers, students/apprentices and trainers
 Research methods
 Interviews (different types), observations and design experiments
 Spring 2016: Six ethnographic interviews (inspired by Spradley, 1979)
 Purpose: gain insight into the VET teachers’ experiences and
vocabulary regarding boundary crossing and their use of boundary
objects and ICT

The need for instructional materials  a design model
*) Includes both ”Technology, construction and transportation” and ”Food, farming and experiences”

7. From transfer to
boundary crossing
 Boundaries can lead to discontinuity in action or interaction
 Boundary crossing is a concept that has been proposed as an
enriched notion of transfer
 Boundary crossing includes ongoing, two-sided actions and
interactions in and across practices
 Boundary crossing acknowledges conflicts and contradictions
as potential for learning and development
 Boundary crossing is about finding productive ways of relating
intersecting dissimilar practices
(Akkerman & Bakker, 2012 & 2011)

Boundary crossing needs to be facilitated

8. 4 boundary crossing processes
(Akkerman & Bakker, 2011)
Learning mechanisms (dialogical learning processes) that
constitute the ideal crossing between dissimilar practices
1. Identification – focus on differences and similarities
2. Coordination – focus on establishing communicative
connections
3. Reflection – focus on realising and articulating
differences
4. Transformation – focus on the recognition of a shared
problem solving space

9. Boundary objects and technology
Boundary objects
 Boundary objects refer to artefacts bridging/mediating the
crossing – analogue or digital (Akkerman & Bakker, 2011)
Technology
 New technologies provide opportunities for creation of a third
space of learning and integration of theory and practice
(Schwendimann et al, 2015; Nortvig & Eriksen, 2013)
Transfer-mediating tools (Henningsen & Mogensen, 2013)
1. Documentation tools
2. Simulation tools
3. Construction tools
4. Interaction tools
Technology-mediated boundary objects (TBOs)

10. Instructional design model 1.0

11. Field validation
Fall 2016
1. Used as part of an exercise in our Diploma teaching (16 VET
teacher-students)
2. Used as part of an exercise in two workshops at a Danish VET
conference (approx. 40 participants, incl. consultants and leaders)
 Does it make sense – and why/not?
 How would the teachers (consultants etc.) classify technology – and
why?
 What else (knowledge, materials) is needed in terms of designing
for technology-mediated boundary crossing?

12. Field validation – cont.

13. Findings – examples of
technology

14. Findings – cont.
In relation to the model itself
 The categorisation of TBOs depends on the instructional
design strategy
 The model needs to reflect the dynamic nature of this
categorisation

Instructional design model version 2.0
In relation to the use of the model
 The use needs to be further scaffolded

A matrix
Case examples

15. Instructional design model 2.0

16. Scaffolding – the TBOC-matrix

17. Case x - Linda the Chef
 Linda teaches chef VET-students and is
planning the first day of the return from the
students’ first workplace period.
 Linda has experienced difficulties in terms of
connecting the students’ work-based
experiences with the school practice
 Linda decides to have the students make
sauce bearnaise as a good (contested)
example
 Linda also wants to use technology in her
teaching


18. Case x – cont.

19. Future research
Spring 2017
Interviews and observations of technology in action
– in VET schools
Focus on:
LMS, video and electronic portfolios
Field validation of instructional model 2.0 and the
scaffolding matrix – in our diploma teaching
Fall 2007
Final analyses
Final dissemination

20. Thank you for listening!
Contact
Marianne Riis, Senior Lecturer, Ph.d.
E-mail: marr@phmetropol.dk
Twitter: @MariisMills
Research blog: https://iktogtransferieud.wordpress.com/

21. References – cited in the
extended abstract
 Akkerman, S.F., and Bakker, A. (2012). Crossing Boundaries Between School and Work During Apprenticeships. Vocations and Learning, 5(1),
p. 153, DOI 10.1007/s12186-011-9073-6
 Akkerman, S.F., and Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary Crossing and Boundary Objects. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 132-169
 Billett, S. (1996). Situated learning: Bridging sociocultural and cognitive theorizing. Learning and Instruction, 6(3), p. 263-280
 Christensen, O., Christiansen, R.B., Gynther, K., Helms, N.H., and Schlüntz, D. (2014). Kan vi lære af de andre? – Udenlandske erfaringer med
e-læring og blended learning I erhvervsuddannelser og læreruddannelser for erhvevsskolelærere [Can we learn from others? – Foreign
experiences with e-learning and blended learning in vocational educations and teacher educations for vocational teachers]. University College
Sjælland
 Engle, R.A. (2012). The resurgence of research into transfer: an introduction to the final articles of the transfer stand. Journal of the Learning
Sciences, 21:3, 347-352.
 Engeström, Y., Engeström, R. & Kärkkäinen, M. (1995). Polycontextuality and boundary crossing in expert cognition: Learning and problem
solving in complex work activities. Learning and Instruction, Vol. 5. pp. 219-336.
 Hahn, C., (2012). Apprenticeship in higher education in France: an experimental device to help apprentices to link academic knowledge and
work experience. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 64(1), p. 75, DOI: 10.1080/13636820.2011.622446
 Henningsen, S.E. and Mogensen, F. (red.) (2013). Mellem teori og praksis. Om transfer i professionsuddannelser [Between theory and practice.
About transfer in vocational educations]. VIA Systime
 Heilesen , S. , Mogensen , K. & Gleerup , J. (2012). Designing for Learning in Coupled Contexts. In Hodgson, V., Jones, C., de Laat, M.,
McConnell, D., Ryberg, D. & Sloep, P., (eds), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Networked Learning 2012. Maastricht School
of Management , pp. 89-96

22. References – cited in the
extended abstract
 Illeris, K., (2009). Transfer of learning in the learning society: How can the barriers between different learning spaces be
surmounted, and how can the gap between learning inside and outside schools be bridged? International Journal of Lifelong
Education, 28(2), p. 137, DOI: 10.1080/02601370902756986
 Lobato, J. (2006). Alternative perspectives on the transfer of learning. History, issues, and challenges for future research. Journal
of the Learning Sciences, 15(4), 431-449.
 Messman, G., and Mulder, R.H., (2015). Conditions for apprentices’ learning activities at work. Journal of Vocational Education &
Training, 67(4), p.578, DOI: 10.1080/13636820.2015.10947457
 Motta, E., Cattaneo, A., and Gurtner, J.L., (2014). Mobile devices to bridge the gap inVET: Ease of use and usefulness as
indicators for their acceptance. Journal of Education and Training studies, 2(1), p. 165-179, DOI:10.11114/jets.v2i1.184
 Nortvig, A.M. and Eriksen, K.K., (2013). Teknologistøttet simuleringsundervisning – som translokation for teoretisk viden og
praktisk handlen [Technology-supported simulation instruction – as translocation for theoretical knowledge and practical action].
Læring & Medier, 11(1), p. 1-21
 Ortoleva, G. and Bétrancourt, M. (2015). Collaborative writing and discussion in vocational education: Effects on learning and self-
efficacy beliefs. Journal of writing research, 1(1), p. 1-19, DOI: 10.17239/jowr-2015.07.05
 Riis, M., Bergstedt, P. & Rasmussen, C.L. (unpublished). Undervisningsdifferentiering og it i de erhvervsrettede uddannelser – en
eksploartiv forundersøgelse. [Differentiation and ICT in Vocational Education - an explorative pre-study]. Internal report.
 Schwendimann, B.A., Cattaneo, A.A.P., Zufferey, J.D., Gurtner, J.L., Bétrancourt, M., and Dillenbourg, P., (2015). The
‘Erfahrraum’: a pedagogical model for designing educational technologies in dual vocational systems. Journal of Vocational
Education & Training, 67(3), p.367, DOI: 10.1080/13636820.2015.1061041

23. References – cited in the
extended abstract
 Tangaard, L., (2007). Learning at trade vocational school and learning at work: boundary crossing in
apprentices’ everyday life. Journal of Education and Work, 20(5), p. 153, DOI: 10.1080/13639080701814414
 Tuomi-Gröhn, T. Engeström, Y., & Young, M. (2003). From transfer to boundary crossing between school
and work as a tool for developing vocational education: An introduction. In T. Tuomi-Gröhn & Y. Engeström
(Eds.), Between school and work: New perspectives on transfer and boundary-crossing pp. 1–18.
Amsterdam, Netherlands: Pergamon.
 Yin, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research. Design and methods. 4th edition. SAGE.
 Aarkrog, V. (2010). Erhvervsuddannelsesforskningen i Danmark. [Vocational Education Research in
Denmark]. Størner, T. & Hansen, J.A. (red.) Erhvervspædagogik – mål, temaer og vilkår i eud’s verden. s.
73-82. Erhvervsskolernes Forlag.
 Aarkrog, V. (2005). Learning in the workplace and the significance of school-based education: a study of
learning in a Danish vocational education and training programme. International Journal of lifelong
education, 24(2), 12.