Country report for SELFIE WBL piloting Germany Maria João Proença (EfVET) Miha Zimšek (Skupnost VSŠ) Anita Goltnik Urnaut (Skupnost VSŠ) Alicia Leonor Sauli Miklavčič (Skupnost VSŠ) Ralph Hippe (JRC) 2021 EUR 30824 EN This publication is a report by the Joint Research Centre (JRC), the European Commission’s science and knowledge service. It aims to provide evidence-based scientific support to the European policymaking process. The scientific output expressed does not imply a policy position of the European Commission. Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use that might be made of this publication. For information on the methodology and quality underlying the data used in this publication for which the source is neither Eurostat nor other Commission services, users should contact the referenced source. The designations employed and the presentation of material on the maps do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on th e part of the European Union concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Contact information Name: Cesar Herrero Address: Edificio Expo, C/ Inca Garcilaso 3, 41092 Sevil e, Spain Email: cesar.herrero-ramila@ec.europa.eu EU Science Hub https://ec.europa.eu/jrc JRC124778 EUR 30824 EN PDF ISBN 978-92-76-41482-7 ISSN 1831-9424 doi:10.2760/406787 Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2021 © European Union, 2021 The reuse policy of the European Commission is implemented by the Commission Decision 2011/833/EU of 12 December 2011 on the reuse of Commission documents (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39). Except otherwise noted, the reuse of this document is authorised under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This means that reuse is al owed provided appropriate credit is given and any changes are indicated. For any use or reproduction of photos or other material that is not owned by the EU, permission must be sought directly from the copyright holders. Al content © European Union, 2021, except: cover image © j-mel - stock.adobe.com How to cite this report: Proença, MJ, Zimšek, M, Goltnik Urnaut, A, Sauli Miklavčič, AL, and Hippe, R. Country report for SELFIE WBL piloting. Germany, EUR 30824 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2021, ISBN 978-92-76-41482-7, doi:10.2760/406787, JRC124778. Abstract: This report presents the results of the pilot study of SELFIE for work-based learning carried out in Germany between September and December 2020. The study aimed at testing the tool before its launch online. In total, 14 VET col eges and 25 companies (operating in different sectors) were engaged in the pilot, involving 3916 users (teachers, students, school leaders and in-company trainers). In addition, 214 individuals (students, teachers, school leaders, school coordinators and in -company trainers) participated in the qualitative research carried out after the pilot. This research included interviews and focus groups, with the purpose of col ecting further feedback. The overal results indicate that SELFIE WBL tool is user-friendly and easy to understand, wel designed and inclusive with its 360-degree reflection, as it engaged al those involved in WBL activities in the German WBL system. The SELFIE WBL tool and the report provided supp ort to school leaders in the development and monitoring of the school’s digital strategy as wel as provided relevant information to al stakeholders in the SELFIE WBL pilot, contributing to increasing the effectiveness of learning in VET schools and companies. Contents 1 Introduction 4 2 Digital education and WBL policies 6 3 Set up of the pilot 8 3.1 Methodology for selecting the pilot schools and companies 8 3.2 Methodology for translating and adapting SELFIE materials 12 4 Pilot implementation 13 5 Fol ow up: quantitative and qualitative analyses 16 5.1 Methodology 16 5.2 Quantitative results 18 5.3 Qualitative results 22 5.3.1Initial motivation from participants 23 5.3.2 Strengths and weaknesses of the SELFIE WBL tool 24 5.3.3 Questionnaire, content, and SELFIE WBL report 24 5.3.4 Current and future use of SELFIE WBL 25 5.4 Overal findings 26 6 Lessons learnt and suggestions for future development 28 7 Implications of COVID-19 pandemic 31 8 Conclusions and recommendations 33 References 35 List of abbreviations and definitions 37 List of figures 38 List of Tables 39 Annexes 40 Annex 1. Key information on the WBL system 41 Annex 2. Dominant economic sectors in Germany 45 Annex 3. Guidelines and templates for focus groups, semi-structured interviews, and list of chal enges 46 Annex 4. Analysis of open question “Suggestions for improvement” and examples of questions 56 Annex 5. School report “Overview of areas” 58 Annex 6. Figures and tables with results of SELFIE WBL piloting quantitative data 60 Annex 7. Overview of SELFIE WBL results in Germany 66 Annex 8. Country fiche 78 Annex 9. List of tools similar to SELFIE and other tools used in WBL 80 Acknowledgements We would like to thank al vocational education and training (VET) schools and companies that, on a voluntary basis, have participated in the SELFIE for work-based learning (WBL) piloting experience during the most chal enging period of the last century. A word of appreciation goes to the national coordination team who, tirelessly, assured the engagement and continuous support of participating schools and companies and provided the valuable information without which the pilot experience and the report would not have been possible. We would also like to thank DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion and the European Training Foundation (ETF) for the effective col aboration al along the piloting phase and DG Education and Culture for the support. In addition, we would like to thank the national coordinators of al nine piloting countries for the fruitful exchanges and opportunities of mutual learning that have facilitated the piloting process. Final y, the active involvement and support of national VET and WBL stakeholders has been crucial in this endeavour of piloting SELFIE WBL during the COVID-19 crisis. Disclaimer The aggregated and anonymised data which is presented in this document has been extracted by the European Commission from the SELFIE database and does not necessarily reflect an official opinion of the Commission. The Commission does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this document. Neither the Commission nor any person acting on the Commission’s behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein. The views expressed in this report are purely those of the authors and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission. Note: This report was produced in the framework of the contract agreement 939672 – 2020 BE between European Forum of Technical and Vocational Education and Training (EfVET) and European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC)- "Piloting SELFIE for work-based learning contexts in VET (SELFIE WBL), Lot 1: Germany. Executive summary SELFIE is an online self-reflection tool developed to support schools, including VET, to assess their digital readiness and preparedness by looking at different dimensions such as VET school strategies, infrastructure, teaching practices, equipment and the experience of students. The tool was developed in 2018 by the JRC and the Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture. In early 2020, in cooperation with the Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, it was adapted to include a module on work-based learning which adds the views of in-company trainers. The aim has been to help improve coordination between VET schools and training companies, and to discuss how they could jointly embed digital technology in their training and apprenticeship programmes. This also means bringing VET teachers and in-company trainers closer together. Throughout 2020, the JRC launched a pilot experience of SELFIE for work-based learning contexts in VET (SELFIE WBL) in nine different countries. EfVET in collaboration with JRC organised them in in France, Poland, Hungary and Germany. In addition, JRC managed the pilot in Romania. Four additional non-EU countries (Georgia, Montenegro, Republic of Serbia and Turkey) piloted SELFIE WBL managed by ETF and JRC. The piloting of SELFIE WBL in Germany was launched in July 2020 and effectively roled out in September 2020. It entailed three main phases; the first one related to the translation of al supporting documents and the tool itself; the second to the selection and engagement of stakeholders (including VET schools and companies), and the third related to the piloting of the SELFIE WBL in the selected VET schools and companies, as wel as the qualitative research consisting of the organisation of focus groups with students and teachers in each one of the VET schools, in-depth interviews with school directors and in-company trainers and additional desk research on similar self-reflection and other digital tools in use in the country. The main emphasis of the piloting experience was on the qualitative research as it alowed to colect quality information with the view of contributing to practice development and improving the SELFIE WBL tool and its further development. 13 VET schools were involved in the qualitative research, including 20 focus groups (total ing 67 teachers and 120 students) and 14 semi-structured interviews with school leaders and company representatives were organised which al ow the col ection of relevant feedback regarding the tool. The pilot process was disturbed by the COVID-19 pandemic with the confinement measures taken by the German government, impacting the data col ection process and requiring great effort from those implementing the pilot, i.e. the ‘national team’ and the ‘school coordinators’ to assure the delivery, as planned, of al activities. This also had a massive impact on the educational community’s state of mind making it difficult to motivate and engage participants to fil out the SELFIE WBL tool. However, the overal feedback received was that the SELFIE WBL tool is user-friendly and easy to understand, wel designed, and inclusive with its 360-degree reflection, as it engaged al those involved in WBL activities in the German WBL system (students, teachers, school leaders and in-company trainers). The main chalenges for the companies and VET schools proved to be the digital infrastructure, the digital competences and knowledge of teachers, the digital learning skil s of students, and the overal implementation of digital technologies in the classroom. Likewise, for in-company trainers, the biggest chal enges mentioned were the continuing professional development (CPD) and the digital competences of students. The SELFIE WBL tool and the report provided support to school leaders in the development and monitoring of the school’s digital strategy, as wel as provided relevant information to al stakeholders in the SELFIE WBL pilot, contributing to increasing the effectiveness of learning in VET schools and companies. School leaders have also expressed the intention to use it on a regular basis. School leaders have also expressed their interest in the next steps of SELFIE WBL and to explore further opportunities of SELFIE WBL to facilitate engagement of and impact on al stakeholders. According to them, next to the technological aspect and competences, also teachers’ attitudes towards the “digital world” and digitalisation in general have to be taken into consideration. School leaders shared their perspective regarding the importance of digitalisation not only as a result of the pandemic, but rather as encouragement for al stakeholders (schools, companies) to increase the effectiveness of teaching and learning. Feedback provided was that the SELFIE WBL pilot came at the right time, not only for schools and their leaders, but also for teachers, students and in-company trainers. The next chal enge wil be to act based on the SELFIE WBL report results. 1 Introduction The pilot of SELFIE for work-based learning contexts was carried out in nine countries. The European Forum of Technical and Vocational Education and Training (EfVET) in collaboration with European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) have organised them in France, Poland, Hungary and Germany. JRC has managed the pilot in Romania. In addition, the European Training Foundation (ETF) in collaboration with JRC has piloted the tool in four non-EU countries namely Georgia, Montenegro, Republic of Serbia and Turkey. The overal management of the SELFIE WBL pilot in Germany was carried out by EfVET in col aboration with JRC. The pilot was coordinated at national level by Berufsbildende Schule Wirtschaft (BBSW), EfVET member in Germany. The qualitative research and reporting of the pilot was led by EfVET member in Slovenia - Skupnost višjih strokovnih šol Republike Slovenije (Skupnost VSŠ). Overal Management of SELFIE WBL in Germany - specific responsibilities alocated to each organisation were as fol ows: EfVET – The European Forum of Technical and Vocational Education and Training was the project coordinator and responsible for the overal project management, quality and reporting. More specifical y the Project Manager was responsible for the implementation of the work plan, for al administrative and financial management of the proposal and for assuring each member of the team was provided with the support needed to implement the tasks. EfVET had one member of the governance responsible for overseeing the piloting process and one project manager responsible for the operations and ongoing support of the national coordinators and the liaison with JRC. Skupnost VSŠ – Skupnost višjih strokovnih šol Republike Slovenije was a research partner and, as such, responsible for the qualitative research including conducting the case studies as wel as for the final report summarising the process of and lessons learnt from the piloting of SELFIE WBL in VET schools and companies and for compiling the list of digital tools used in the work-based learning (WBL) sector for each country. Skupnost VSŠ had three members who were part of the research team (one senior and one junior researcher, and a senior WBL expert), working directly with EfVET and the national coordinators. BBSW – Berufsbildende Schule Wirtschaft was the national coordinator for Germany and as such responsible for the translation and adaptation of SELFIE WBL and supporting materials into German, for reaching out and engaging the stakeholders, VET schools and companies, and for overseeing the piloting of the SELFIE WBL tool and supporting the research component. The national coordinator worked very closely with school coordinators providing ongoing support. The national coordinator had a pivotal role in the piloting process for the ongoing support to VET schools and companies. BBSW had one member of staff dedicated to the SELFIE WBL pilot - one senior VET expert supported by the EfVET National Board and network in Germany. Management at national level - responsibilities were defined as folows: The national coordinator had a pivotal role in the SELFIE WBL piloting process and the selection of VET schools and companies at national level. The national team was responsible for the ongoing support of VET schools, the engagement of national stakeholders, the preparation and delivery of planned webinars, and acting as a liaison between Skupnost VSŠ and VET schools in everything related to the research component, including the translation of support materials developed for that effect. The national team was responsible for conducting the interviews with school leaders and company representatives. The school coordinators were the main organisational force at institutional level engaging and mobilising companies, school leaders, teachers and students and offering them ongoing support during the pilot process. The school coordinator was also responsible for the organisation of the focus groups that took place in schools – one with teachers and the other with students. The school coordinators were also responsib le for the management of the relationship with companies and any support that might be required throughout the SELFIE WBL pilot. 2 Digital education and WBL policies The vocational education and training system in Germany is based on the dual system which forms the core element of vocational training. Every young person who has completed ful -time compulsory school has access to dual training having no further requirements. This training pathway is characterised by two learning venues namely companies and vocational schools, covering al economic and programmatic sectors. The Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training (BIBB), responsible for the overal management of the dual system in Germany, stresses that the dual system is at the heart of the German VET system. BIBB and the German Office for International Cooperation in Vocational Education and Training provide a very detailed explanation of the system's different aspects on their websites, some of which wil be described here, with the purpose of providing an overview of how the dual system works on a practical level in Germany and to provide an overview of the most up-to-date figures. The dual system in Germany offers the possibility to young people to further progress their studies either through initial tertiary education or to further explore other vocational education and training anywhere in Germany. Overal , there is a col ective recognition of the positive contribution of the dual system to economic performance and competitiveness; the skil s match to market needs (employers/employees) and a third dimension of critical importance, the social and economic integration of young people (inclusiveness). Dual training provides a high level of employment security (96.4% of dual VET graduates employed; only 82.1% employed among untrained people) and data shows 74% of dual VET trainees are hired as temporary or permanent employees after training (BIBB, 2019). The expenditure made by companies is shared with the government whose investments are split between public vocational schools providing part-time VET, steering, monitoring and other supporting measures. BIBB states that 70% of investment is refinanced by the productive contribution of trainees during the training period (BIBB, 2019). Overal, there is a common recognition of the contribution of the dual system to the strength of smal and medium-sized enterprises’ (SME) competitiveness on international markets and their contribution to the low youth unemployment rate (estimated at 4.7% in early 2019) (BIBB, 2019). There are two main components in the VET dual-track system namely: classroom study in specialised trade schools and supervised on-the-job work experience. Over the course of two to three years, on average, apprentices spend a few days a week, or even blocks of several weeks at a time, at a vocational school (Berufsschule) where they obtain theoretical knowledge on their occupation of choice. At the same time, a company or public sector institution hosts the apprentices where they gain practical knowledge and hands-on experience. The apprentices usual y spend 70 % of their time in the workplace under the supervision of a certified trainer, and 30 % in the classroom (BIBB, 2019). The Dual VET certificate is issued by chamber organisations and it is nationaly recognised by the government. The dual system in Germany is characterised by a multi-stakeholder approach where the business community, social partners and government are involved in the supervision, monitoring and support. It should also be mentioned that the dual VET standards are based on requirements of the world of work, meaning that in articulation with BIBB the dual offer is analysed based on the needs of the market which is provided by the employers and based on the information social partners and government negotiate and adopt as new standards for in-company training (training regulations) under the guidance of the BIBB. This then leads to a process whereby the educational standards (educational frameworks) are reviewed and updated accordingly. Al dimensions of the dual system are framed by a system of laws. Even though chal enges are stil faced by the dual system, its strengths and consistency are recognised across Europe (see Figure 10 in Annex 1). The Digital Strategy in Germany was officialy launched in 2014 (with the first Agenda launched for the period 2014-2017) and, from its very beginning, it has focused on the development of a holistic and humanistic approach where individuals are at the core of al initiatives in recognition that the skil s and abilities of everyone wil serve the future and capacity to innovate of Germany and Europe (The Federal Government, 2014). The strategy acknowledges the fast pace by which technology is changing the ways people work, live and think and the need to respond to these changes. The digital strategy is directly linked to other strategic measures and seen, as mentioned, from a holistic perspective bringing together al key actors from different sectors. It focuses on five main fields of action: digital competence, infrastructure, and equipment, innovation and digital transformation, society in digital change and modern state initiatives, entailing cross-cutting actions linked to safety and equality in terms of access – understood as a dynamic process in the sense of open dialogue to meet the chal enges of the digital change together. In the field of education and training, the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) emphasises the investment already made in the improvement of digital education and training in al educational institutions as a way of helping schoolchildren, teachers and trainers, trainees and students, employees and non-employees across generations to become digital y competent. Even though an increase of basic skils in computer applications and internet skil s have been observed (Initiative D21, 2019)1 these are only moderately spread and there is stil a labour gap not only in the academic world but also in the workforce. Different milestones have been set and several initiatives have been (and are planned to be) taken at VET level, together with the Federal States and other relevant actors to help people of al generations become digitaly competent, acknowledging that digital skil s are acquired and expanded in vocational and academic education, in the job itself and in adult (continuous) education. The details of these milestones and initiatives can be found on the government website where the key national strategies issued over the past five years are published (Die Bundesregierung, 2020). With the purpose of strengthening digital education and training, BMBF has set the milestone of increasing the percentage of people who have basic skil s by 2025 from 68 % to 75 %, for which the fol owing initiatives wil be either continued or implemented: Vocational Education 4.0; STEM Action Plan; Digital media in vocational training and basic digital education (BMBF, 2019). Aimed at supporting the continuous transition of the educational system into the digital age, BMBF has set additional milestones related to the need to assure al educational and training institutions are appropriately equipped with efficient learning infrastructures (see Figure 11 in Annex 1). Initiatives such as the School Cloud, Digitalisation of inter-company educational places, Online applications for education-related state Services and Education register are examples of this support. In addition to the above, the Digital Pact (Kulturminister Konferenz, 2019), another initiative launched in 2016, aims at assuring schools and training institutions are properly resourced and have the financial support to do it. This funding is available to al types of schools eligible for this support. The goal is to support the development of a modern digital learning infrastructure nationwide. The milestones regarding the transition of (VET) training systems into the digital age have been set as fol ows: — With the support of the Digital Pact, al schools aiming at becoming digital wil be supported with equipment and wil become digital by 2025. — With the special programme of digitization, the intercompany vocational training centres (ÜBS) wil be equipped with digital technologies for modern, high-quality and flexible training for skil ed workers. Another initiative that wil benefit – indirectly – al educational sectors including VET is related to the further support and training of experts in education in big data management. This wil enable the further development of secure digital educational spaces, some of which are related to VET and job integration (BMBF, 2019a). 1 The large society study D21-Digital-Index provides an annual picture of the digitalization of society in Germany. Almost 20,500 German citizens aged 14 and over, including those who are offline, are surveyed. The D21 digital index thus shows the entire German resident population. 3 Set up of the pilot 3.1 Methodology for selecting the pilot schools and companies Selection criteria for VET schools were set to capture and reflect the diversity of VET schools (see Figure 1) and their environment according to: - size of VET schools (as defined in the SELFIE WBL tool), - location (as defined in the SELFIE WBL tool), - geographical coverage (result of agreement within the SELFIE WBL pilot team), - programme area coverage (result of agreement within the SELFIE WBL pilot team) and - number of VET schools (at least 12 VET schools). Figure 1. Selection criteria for VET schools. Source: Skupnost VSŠ. (2020) Regarding the school size and location, the decision was to apply the same criteria as defined by JRC in the SELFIE WBL tool. Regarding the different programmes offered by the different VET Schools, this was the result of a consultation with the SELFIE WBL pilot team in the 4 countries where the pilot is being overseen by EfVET. It does not intend to be an exhaustive list of al the programmes in the country but rather reflect the common areas identified by the SELFIE WBL pilot team. The agreed minimum number of VET schools to be engaged in the SELFIE WBL pilot was 12. One important consideration was the voluntary participation of schools in the pilots which meant, on a practical level, that the ultimate criteria would be the school’s availability and wil ingness to participate in the pilot and commitment to the proposed responsibilities. Mapping VET Schools in Germany was done by the national Coordinator BBSW via their own networks of VET providers in the country: EfVET Germany - constituted by 15 members which are very active on the European level, e.g. in Erasmus+ Mobility and pilot projects. The regional distribution goes from Lower Saxony and Brandenburg in the north to VET schools in the south-west within the Network of European Schools in Germany, consisting of European schools from 16 regions in Germany. The title ”European school“ was awarded by the respective regional Ministry of Education and schools must have met certain quality criteria (which are similar throughout the different federal states). The report from the national coordination team is that there is no central repository for VET schools in Germany and the way the information is provided varies by federal state. However, the BIBB (2020) reports 1,330,767 students in dual education nationwide in 2018 in their latest Register of Recognised Training Occupations 2020 (BIBB, 2020). The above-mentioned approach consisting of reaching out to existing national networks of VET schools, was considered best given the limited timeline of the SELFIE WBL pilot. These two networks were fundamental in facilitating and providing access to VET schools and were contacted by the national SELFIE WBL coordinator. The ultimate decision to participate was made by VET schools. In addition to the above, additional contacts were made as a result of informal requests from the SELFIE WBL team and JRC, which facilitated the contact of three further VET schools in Germany. Outreach and Engagement – BBSW has established one-to-one communication with each VET school that expressed interest and availability to participate in the SELFIE WBL pilot, providing additional information regarding the piloting process and the qualitative research, explaining the advantages and benefits of the SELFIE WBL pilot, and providing information on the type of support available should VET schools decide to participate. This ongoing communication was critical to assure VET schools’ engagement and commitment to participate in the SELFIE WBL pilot. A Memorandum of Understanding was sent to al VET schools to be signed, to formalise the cooperation between EfVET, BBSW and each of the VET schools. Overal, 14 VET schools from 4 different federal states have been engaged in the SELFIE WBL pilot, the majority of which with over 1000 students involved in the dual system. Most of them are located in urban areas, there is a diversity in terms of geography and also in terms of programme areas. The summary of VET schools engaged in the SELFIE WBL pilot and the diversity of coverage according to the above set criteria can be seen in Figures 2 and 3. Figure 2. The diversity of selected VET schools according to size, location and programme area. Source: Skupnost VSŠ. (2021) Figure 3. The diversity of selected VET schools and companies according to geographical coverage. Source: Skupnost VSŠ. (2021) Selection criteria for companies were set to cover and reflect the diversity of companies prioritising the relevant national economic areas (see Annex 2) and the diversity thereof. The selection criteria for the diversity of companies (see Figure 4) were set to: - company size (Commission Recommendation of 6 May 2003, 2003) and - economic sector coverage (result of agreement within the SELFIE WBL pilot team). Figure 4. Selection criteria for companies. Source: Skupnost VSŠ. (2020) Engagement of companies was managed by selected VET schools from the pool of companies each VET school works with. In Germany, and as a result of the way the dual system is set up, VET schools have a very close relationship with the companies they work with, which was key to reaching out and engaging them in the pilot. The above criteria were presented to each VET school by BBSW. The minimum requirement set for the SELFIE WBL pilot was to engage at least one company per VET school involved. Their engagement was based on their availability and wil ingness to participate and aligned with criteria set above, despite the additional measures taken as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The number of companies engaged was 25 and the diversity of coverage according to the above set criteria can be seen in Figure 5. Figure 5. Selected companies per selection criteria. Source: Skupnost VSŠ. (2021) Overal, there was an effort at national level to be as diverse as possible regarding the economic sectors. There is, as the figure reflects, a great diversity regarding the company size as wel as the different economic sectors representing the most dominant sectors such as business services, automotive industry, machine industry, production of electrical and electronic equipment and the chemical industry (see Annex 2). Against the initial expectation of having 12 companies engaged in the SELFIE WBL piloting, VET schools have engaged more than one company resulting in 25 companies (more than the double) in 4 different federal states (see Figure 3). There is, as Figure 5 reflects, a great diversity regarding the company size as wel as the different economic sectors represented. Initial y, it had been planned to have companies’ representatives signing a Memorandum of Understanding. Given the feedback received by the national coordinator regarding the chal enges the process of having companies signing this document would represent, and the wish of VET schools to take responsibility for the management of the communication and relationship with the different companies engaged in the SELFIE WBL pilot, EfVET decided not to proceed with this formalisation on the basis that it was not needed, and it was adding an unnecessary administrative burden. 3.2 Methodology for translating and adapting SELFIE materials The translation and adjustment of SELFIE WBL consisted of 3 main actions namely: (1) linguistic translation, (2) content-focused translation and (3) contextual adaptation and usability. The first one refers to the translation of the documents provided by JRC and was carried out by BBSW. The second and third actions related to the translations carried out simultaneously and brought together VET and WBL experts from 2 different VET schools. The involvement of external VET and WBL experts was done to assure the language and the terminology used were clear and understandable by al those involved and in line with the official ones used in the country. Initialy the plan was to involve the Regional Department of Education in the process of review but due to the timing set for the task, overlapping with summer holidays, this was not possible. The linguistic translation took place in the first 2 months of the project. There was an initial misunderstanding regarding the deadlines set for the different actions and some delays were observed in steps 2 and 3. Figure 6. Translation process. Source: Skupnost VSŠ. (2020) 4 Pilot implementation The SELFIE WBL pilot was implemented in the folowing steps (see Figure 7): Figure 7. Implementation process. Source: Skupnost VSŠ. (2020) Step 1) Translation of SELFIE WBL materials was done from August to September 2020 (see chapter 3.2 Methodology for translating and adapting SELFIE materials). Step 2) Mobilisation of VET schools and companies took place from July to September 2020 (see chapter 3.1 Methodology for selecting the pilot schools and companies). Step 3) Selections of VET schools and companies were conducted from July to September 2020 (see chapter 3.1 Methodology for selecting the pilot schools and companies) and the Memorandums of Understanding were signed with each selected VET school defining roles and commitments of each VET school to formalise this cooperation after the selection in September 2020. Step 4) Preparatory webinar was organised by the national coordinator to bring together al national stakeholders, EfVET, JRC, European Commission as wel as VET schools, companies and the research team on 14 September 2020. The main objective was to present the aim of the SELFIE WBL, provide an overview of implementation steps, school self-reflection reports, personalised certificates and digital badges, schools’ and companies’ commitments and timeline. Furthermore, feedback from each representative on any concerns and expectations was discussed as wel as the mapping of digital tools for WBL used in the country, schools and companies. Step 5) Piloting of the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise began by VET schools registering into the SELFIE tool, planning the activation period, announcing the SELFIE WBL pilot within the school and among partner companies, and motivating them to participate by explaining the benefits of their participation. When activating the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise, school coordinators monitored and reported the participation rate (40 % of WBL students, 40 % of VET teachers and at least 1 in-company trainer) and further motivated and promoted the participation among the target groups needed. Most difficult to motivate proved to be in-company trainers as they are not in school and under the management of the school. The SELFIE WBL process took place from September to October 2020, and the feedback from the exercise is presented in chapter 5.2 Quantitative results. Step 6) Follow-up and guidance webinar was organised by the national coordinator addressing only VET schools and company representatives on 8 October 2020. The aim was to fol ow up the piloting experience, gather initial feedback from school coordinators, address any chal enges that may have arisen during the process, confirm the overal figures in terms of completion of the questionnaires , and prepare school coordinators for the conduction of focus groups for students and teachers and semi-structured interviews for school leaders and company representatives. The school coordinators were asked to provide feedback on their experience during the implementation process through the list of chal enges provided by the research team. The research team also provided the guidelines and reporting templates for focus group implementation as wel as the list of chal enges to school coordinators, guidelines and reporting templates for semi-structured interview implementation to the national coordinator. The guidelines, report templates and the list of chalenges can be found in Annex 3. Step 7) Focus groups were organised by school coordinators in November and December 2020. Two focus groups were organised per VET school, one with students and one with teaching staff to reflect and discuss their interpretation and in-depth understanding of the relevant report results. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic the school coordinators struggled to organise focus groups and reach the agreed participation rate of 10 students/teachers per focus group (see chapter 7 Implications of COVID-19). In total 20 focus groups were organised involving 120 students and 67 teachers. The feedback from the focus groups is integrated in chapter 5.3 Qualitative results. Step 8) In-depth semi-structured interviews were organised by national coordinators from November 2020 to February 2021. The aim was to conduct 14 interviews with 4 in-company trainers and decision-making staff in VET schools (4 pedagogical managers/directors, 4 sector heads/managers, 4 board heads/directors) to reflect and discuss their interpretation and in-depth understanding of the report results and to plan improvements based on those results. Interviews were conducted online. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic the national coordinators struggled to engage in-company trainers (see chapter 7 Implications of COVID-19). In total 14 interviews were conducted involving 13 decision-making staff in VET schools and 1 in-company trainer. The feedback from the interviews is integrated in chapter 5.3 Qualitative results. Step 9) Evaluation webinar brought together al national stakeholders, EfVET, JRC and the research team on 12 January 2021. The main purpose was to evaluate the experience, col ect information and recommendations regarding the SELFIE WBL tool from policy makers and other institutional representatives at national level, the opportunities they see for the broader use of the tool in the WBL sector, and to identify possible dissemination actions that could take place. The research team presented the preliminary results and discussed those with the participants. The feedback from the webinar is integrated in chapter 5.3 Qualitative results. Step 10) Quantitative and qualitative research were conducted simultaneously and upon the receipt of feedback from al above activities from September 2020 to February 2021. The research team prepared the quantitative analysis based on the results of the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise provided by JRC and the qualitative analysis based on the feedback from focus groups (teachers and students), semi-structured interviews (school leaders and in-company trainers), the list of chal enges (school coordinators), the fol ow-up and evaluation webinars (for details see chapter 5 Fol ow up: quantitative and qualitative analyses). The timeline of the SELFIE WBL pilot was severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic which delayed the implementation of focus groups, semi-structured interviews, the evaluation webinar and in consequence the qualitative and quantitative research. It also affected the engagement of participants (see chapter 7 Implications of COVID-19). 5 Follow up: quantitative and qualitative analyses 5.1 Methodology This project aimed to explore a broad scope of aspects of the SELFIE WBL tool to contribute to practice development and to improve the SELFIE WBL tool and its further development. To reach these aims and to increase the internal and external validity of the research results, the research design is based on methodological triangulation of using several different methods. The research team and its project partners used an approach of integrating the quantitative and qualitative methodology. Therefore, the following methods and techniques were used (Majchrzak, 1990): — Analysis of primary sources: analysis of anonymised data provided by JRC. — Analysis of secondary sources prepared by JRC: 4 reports showing aggregated graphs of SELFIE WBL pilot data which were: Participation (numerus and per cent according to different demographic variables), Satisfaction (per cent and mean for values of overal score and further recommendations), Main Areas (per cent of positive responses for area and each variable) and Additional Information (per cent of answers). — Analysis of school reports generated by school coordinators, involved in SELFIE WBL pilot. — Semi-structured interview reports, involving 2 respondent groups (school leaders and in-company trainers) provided by the national coordinator. — Focus groups reports, involving the 2 other respondent groups (teachers and students). The quantitative data were col ected through the SELFIE WBL questionnaires, which were answered by school leaders, teachers, students and in-company trainers. The SELFIE WBL tool provides state-of-the-art information as perceived by the respondent groups. Respondents were selected in a manner such that it is possible to make a representative conclusion (Ragin, 2007) at institutional level. We used univariate methods in this study. They are primarily intended to present the distribution of variables’ values; hence the tables in chapter 5.2 and Annex 6 display the number of valid values and additional statistics that we selected: mean (the average value) and standard deviation. In our database, the number of valid responses varied between the variables. When answering the questions for which the quantitative analysis is presented, the respondents had a help text and answered mostly on a 5-level scale with the additional option “prefer not to say” or “not applicable” (and in two cases on a 10-level scale, one question being for al respondent groups and another for two respondent groups). For some questions they had the possibility to select the answer or not (multiple choice). In the fol owing quantitative part (see chapter 5.2) we present frequency tables and descriptive statistics. The tables with descriptive statistics display: — N = number of valid responses from the respondents, — Mean (M) = the average value of the data points or numbers, — Standard deviation (SD) = a measure of the dispersion of a dataset relative to its mean. The qualitative research component of the SELFIE WBL pilot had as its goal to colect feedback in view of improving the SELFIE WBL tool before it is launched online. The qualitative data were col ected through desk research, feedback from school coordinators, focus groups and in-depth semi-structured interviews. The main goal of the desk research was to map out existing similar self-reflection tools in the country used in WBL contexts and to identify other existing digital tools. These mapping and listing tasks were done in two different ways. On the one hand the research team conducted comprehensive online desk research of al official and available websites from governmental institutions responsible for overseeing WBL in the country. On the other hand, by col ecting this information from the different respondent groups engaged in the pilot (see Annex 8). Focus groups brought groups of people together with the main purpose to col ect feedback regarding the SELFIE WBL tool from users’ perspective. The proposal was to conduct two separate focus groups in each VET school, one with teachers involved in the pilot and the other with students (each gathering 10 persons). The selection of the students and teachers did not fol ow any criteria. The selection was left to the school coordinators according to the guidelines, they invited the first 10 teachers/students who applied. Facilitators of focus groups were given guidelines (how to conduct focus groups, how and what to report) and templates for reporting the feedback of the focus groups (see Annex 3). The qualitative research method of in-depth semi-structured interviews consisted in posing a series of open and closed questions to targeted individuals, i.e., pedagogical managers/directors, sector heads/managers, board heads/directors and in-company trainers, with the goal to gain some insight regarding their perspective on the topic of digitalisation, their wil ingness to further explore SELFIE WBL and to integrate the tool in their current work, as wel as to gather recommendations regarding possible ways to improve it (see Annex 3). There were two open questions in SELFIE WBL for students (digital technology they find useful for learning and ideas and suggestions to further improve SELFIE WBL). We analysed them using thematic analysis. Thematic analysis is a method for examining the content of responses from data col ected from open-ended questions, focus group discussions or interviews. It enables identification of emergent topics not explicitly stated in SELFIE WBL questions. It is based on organising key issues in data and grouped into topics reflecting important relations in the research questions (Braun and Clarke, 2006). Results of the thematic analysis were included in the qualitative part of the report (see Annex 4). The qualitative research method of analysis of school reports generated by school coordinators consists of gathering chal enges, advantages of the implementation of SELFIE WBL, and further feedback on the SELFIE WBL process from the perspective of school coordinators, who organised and monitored the SELFIE WBL process within their institutions. To col ect feedback, a template was prepared and provided to school coordinators (see Annex 3). The data colection took place from September 2020 to February 2021. The analysis started in December 2020. Al responses to the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise, focus groups, semi-structured interviews, and analysis of school reports generated by school coordinators remained anonymous and disconnected from contact details to ensure confidentiality. 5.2 Quantitative results Participants in the quantitative analysis were from 12 VET schools. There were 3916 respondents in the database. The participation of school leaders, teachers, students and in-company trainers was as fol ows: — 35 school leaders — 230 teachers — 3619 students — 32 in-company trainers. In the SELFIE WBL pilot the sample of respondents from public schools prevail with 97.5 % meaning only 2.5 % of respondents originated from private VET schools. 53.6 % of respondents were from schools located in cities (100,001-1,000,000 inhabitants), 43.8 % of respondents from towns (15001-100,000 inhabitants), and 2.6 % of respondents from smal towns (3,001-15,000 inhabitants). The SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise consists of eight areas on a five-point Likert scale (1-5). Figure 8 displays the percentage of positive responses (i.e. responses on 4 and 5) by main areas. The most positive responses from al respondents are in the area “Continuing Professional Development” (52.9 %), which is fol owed by the area “Pedagogy: Supports and Resources” (52.0 %) and “Leadership” (40.9 %). On the other hand, the least positive responses from the respondents are seen in the areas “Assessment practises” (22.0 %). Figure 8. P ercentage of positive responses by area. Source: European Commission (2020). SELFIE database, special extraction for SELFIE WBL national coordinators. Table 1 displays average values for main areas by respondent group. The number of questions in the areas differ between the respondent groups. The areas with the highest average score evaluated by school leaders are “Continuing Professional Development” (M=3.8) and “Leadership” (M=3.6). Teachers rated the highest “Pedagogy: Supports and Resources” (M= 3.7) and “Continuing Professional Development” (M=3.4). Students rated “Pedagogy: Supports and Resources” as highest (M=3.5), the second highest rated area being “Infrastructure and Equipment” (M=3.0). In-company trainers rated as the highest areas “Infrastructure and Equipment” (M=3.9) and “Continuing Professional Development” (M=3.7). The lowest mean for al respondent groups is the area “Assessment practices” (school leaders M=2.6, teachers M=2.4, students and in-company trainers M=2.5). The highest average score for al areas was given by in-company trainers (M=3.4), fol owed by school leaders (M=3.2) and teachers (M=3.1). Students’ average score is the lowest (M=2.6). Table 1. Descriptive statistics for main areas by respondent group. School In-company Teachers Students leaders trainers  Main area N=35 N=230 N=3619 N=32 M SD M SD M SD M SD Leadership 3.6 1.0 3.1 1.2 / / 2.8 1.1 Col aboration and Networking 3.1 0.8 2.7 1.1 2.6 1.2 3.1 1.3 Infrastructure and Equipment 3.2 1.0 2.9 1.1 3.0 1.4 3.9 1.2 Continuing Professional Development 3.8 0.8 3.4 1.1 / / 3.7 1.1 Pedagogy: Supports and Resources 3.5 0.7 3.7 1.0 3.5 1.1 2.8 1.2 Pedagogy: Implementation in the classroom 3.2 0.7 3.1 1.1 2.9 1.3 3.1 1.5 Assessment practices 2.6 0.8 2.4 1.2 2.5 1.2 2.5 1.3 Students digital competence 3.4 0.7 3.1 1.0 2.8 1.3 3.6 1.2  Al participants 3.2 0.9 3.1 1.2 2.6 1.4 3.4 1.3 Source: European Commission (2020). SELFIE database, special extraction for SELFIE WBL national coordinators. Note: M=mean, SD= Standard Deviation; Green: the highest score, Grey: the lowest score. Figure 9 displays means for overal satisfaction with SELFIE WBL on a 10-level scale by respondent group. The highest satisfaction is indicated by school leaders (7.0) and the lowest, yet stil above the middle of the 10-level scale, is given by students (6.0). Figure 9. Mean overall score for overall satisfaction with SELFIE WBL by respondent group. Source: European Commission (2020). SELFIE database, special extraction for SELFIE WBL national coordinators. The likelihood for further recommendation of the SELFIE WBL on a 5-level scale was the highest among school leaders (M=3.6) and the lowest among teachers (M=2.7). The percentage of positive responses (“Very likely” and “Extremely likely”) in the group of school leaders was 45.7 %. On the other hand, the highest percentage of negative responses (“Not at al likely” and “Not very likely”) was given by teachers (37.8 %). The percentage of “prefer not to say” answers was the highest among in-company trainers (28.1%). Students and in-company trainers were asked their opinion about the questions included in SELFIE WBL (see Table 3 in Annex 6). They rated the relevance of questions on a 10 -level scale. Students’ average score was slightly below the middle of the scale (M=4.9) and in-company trainers’ average score was above the middle of the scale (M=5.9). The SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise also included questions about respondents. Teachers indicated usefulness of Continuing Professional Development (CPD) activities on the pedagogical use of digital technologies. The percentage of positive responses (i.e. responses on 4 and 5) was the highest for “Other in-house training” (69.5 %), fol owed by “Learning through col aborating” (66.5 %), “Online professional learning” and “Face-to-face professional learning” (both 58.6 %). “Study visit” was chosen with the lowest percentage of positive responses (33.8 %). The answer “Did not participate” was the most often used for “Accredited programmes” (72.2 %). Teachers and in-company trainers were asked about their confidence in the use of digital technologies. Teachers (84.8 % positive responses) and in-company trainers (75.0 %) feel the most confident in using technology for communication. Teachers are least confident in using digital technology for feedback and support (46.4 %), in-company trainers for preparing lessons (53.8 %). Teachers and in-company trainers were asked “For what percentage of teaching/training time have you used digital technologies in class in the past 3 months?”2 There were five possible answers. The highest percentage of teachers and in-company trainers chose answer “11-25 %” of teaching/training time. Around one third of teachers (33.3 %) and in-company trainers (31.8 %) chose answer “51-75 %” or “76-100 %” of teaching/training time. 3 The students reported that they used technology in and out of school most frequently for fun (83.1 %). Two thirds had access to technology outside the school (66.2 %). Answers to the question “Is teaching/training with digital technologies in your school/company negatively affected by the fol owing factors?”4 show school leaders (18.4 %) and teachers (18. 7%) found “Insufficient digital equipment” as the most negative factor. In-company trainers most frequently chose “Lack of time for trainers” (18.3 %). Answers to the question “Is remote teaching and learning/training with digital technology negatively affected by the fol owing factors?”5 show that remote teaching and learning is most often negatively affected by “Limited student access to digital devices” (school leaders 19.2 %, teachers 19.5 %). Teachers chose most often “Limited student access to reliable internet connection” and “Teachers lacking time to develop material for remote teaching” (19.5 %). In-company trainers rated “Trainers lacking time to develop material for remote training” as the most influential negative factor (25.0 %). The percentage of chosen positive factors for remote teaching, learning or training6 shows that school leaders rated with 20.0 % as the most positive factor “Teachers col aborate within the school on digital technologies 2 Teachers responded to the question regarding the situation in their school (teaching), in -company trainers regarding the situation in their company (training). 3 Answers: 0-10%; 11-25%; 26-50%; 51-75%; 76-100% of teaching/training time; Prefer not to say 4 School leaders and teachers responded to the question regarding the situation in their school (teachers), in-company trainers regarding the situation in their company (trainers). 5 School leaders and teachers responded to the question regarding the situation at their school (teachers, teaching), in -company trainers regarding the situation in their company (trainers, training). 6 School leaders and teachers responded to the question regarding the situation in their school and teaching, in-company trainers regarding the situation in their company and training. use and creation of resources”. Teachers evaluated “Teachers participation in professional development programmes” as the most positive factor (19.9 %). In-company trainers chose as the most positive factor for remote training “Trainers col aboration with company on digital technologies use and creation of resources” (17.3 %). For more information on figures and tables, see Annex 6. 5.3 Qualitative results Thirteen out of the fourteen pilot schools were included in the qualitative part of the SELFIE WBL, as one school withdrew from it due to il health of key staff7. Based on the results of the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise, it was not possible to determine by deviation the best and worst performing school as the results were quite similar or differed only in individual parameters. Therefore, we decided to present the results of al covered schools as study cases in this qualitative part. The colection of qualitative data was seriously affected by the second wave of COVID-19, which pushed the implementation of the qualitative phase of the SELFIE WBL pilot down the priority list both in schools and among participants. This manifested itself in difficult access to participants and fewer opportunities for participants to engage actively in focus groups (especial y teaching staff) as they had already dealt with cases of COVID-19, conducting live schooling, and preparing for the transition to remote learning. However, it was extremely chal enging to engage in-company trainers in semi-structured interviews as companies demanded their ful focus on preparing the company to the new situation. Nevertheless, the qualitative analysis was based on feedback from 20 focus groups, 13 semi-structured interviews, 13 school reports, the final evaluation webinar as wel as answers to open questions in the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise (see chapter 5.2 Quantitative results). The focus groups for teaching staff were moderated by a peer teacher and for students were run by a school tutor. In total 67 teachers and 120 students participated in the focus groups (see Table 2). The semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 pedagogical managers, sector managers and school directors as wel as 1 company representative that took part in the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise, al of them being moderated by the national coordinator. School coordinators reported on their coordination and administrator experience when launching and using SELFIE WBL. Table 2. Number of students, teachers, school leaders, in-company trainers and school coordinators involved in the qualitative analysis. Semi- Semi- School Focus groups Focus groups structured structured coordinators School interviews with with students with teachers interviews with (list of in-company school leaders challenges) trainers School 1 10 10 1 1 1 School 2 7 5 1 1 School 3 10 10 1 1 School 4 14 2 1 1 School 5 10 10 1 1 School 6 16 9 1 1 School 7 10 8 1 1 School 8 24 1 1 School 9 School 10 10 5 1 1 School 11 1 1 School 12 1 1 School 13 5 1 1 School 14 9 3 1 1 TOTAL 120 67 13 1 13 Source: Own analysis. During the final evaluation webinar 13 school coordinators, 2 representatives of companies and 1 representative of the federal state Ministry for Education from Rhineland-Palatinate commented the preliminary pilot results. For details on focus groups, semi-structured interviews and chal enges see Annex 3. 7 But they fully completed the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise and those data are covered in the previous chapter, and where relevant, in this chapter. 1.1.1 Initial motivation from participants During the focus groups the students were asked about their expectations from the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise and 78 % of students did not have any prior expectations. Nevertheless, students had a positive attitude expecting improvements in the school’s digitalisation status, of teachers’ commitment to digitalisation and of the technical equipment and capacity (Wi-Fi, better computers). Furthermore, students appreciated their inclusion in the SELFIE WBL exercise to be able to express their own perspective and pointed out the need for a uniform approach to digital applications and tools used at school. In conclusion, most of students did not have any expectations and the other 22 % of students confirm their expectations were met and outline that it was a very detailed self-reflection exercise encompassing digitalisation from many different aspects which makes the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise different from other surveys. However, the teachers answered the same question as students. 70 % of teachers were looking forward to receiving feedback on the status of digitalisation, pointing out the deficits in hardware and software to be addressed in school and companies through a transparent tool including al perspectives (teachers, students, school leaders and in-company trainers). Their initial motivation increased also due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated implementation of remote learning. Furthermore, teachers outlined the expectation that SELFIE WBL gives impetus for a consistent fol ow-up of the digitalisation of lessons. Furthermore, it highlights blended learning as a future-oriented concept, clearly highlighting the need for networking between school and company pointing to possible weaknesses and strengths. Final y, after the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise, the expectation arose that the results would lead to further development in the field of digital teaching. 30 % of teachers did not have specific expectations but general y the approach was positive. In-company trainers proved to be chalenging to motivate because of COVID-19, as the situation in companies got more demanding on a daily basis due to the workload put upon its staff. The feedback from one interviewee and the feedback from the company representatives during webinars show that their major motivation was to contribute to the close working relationship with the schools as their dual partners as wel as to gain an overview on the digitalisation status from al different perspectives. Furthermore, they find SELFIE WBL helpful for the teaching cooperation between schools and companies. In addition, various experiences and views of the dual partner can be included in their future strategies. Their expectations were ful y met. School leaders were highly motivated expecting an instantaneous overview of concrete results and the assessment of digital readiness of their schools from various perspectives transparently. Therefore, identifying deficits in infrastructure and staff’s preparedness to use digital tools in their teaching was no surprise. Additional y, students’ satisfaction with the digital learning opportunities and the reflection of in-company trainers on the extent of IT structures at school being comparable to the industry standards were expected. Their expectations were ful y met (92 %). Furthermore, school leaders indicate that the SELFIE WBL tool proved to be very satisfactory providing very useful information and is to be seen in the context of school development as very relevant. It provides a roadmap for needed investments creating a tension between the available resources and areas to be invested in. In one case the expectations were only partial y met due to a lower participation rate and results were lower than expected. Additional y, school leaders expressed interest in national and international comparisons based on the results. Final y, school coordinators reported that the attitude of al the four target groups was mostly positive, although it is always difficult to motivate participation in self-reflection exercises since many surveys recently had to be conducted due to the pandemic. To stimulate participation, informational activities were undertaken and flyers displaying benefits were disseminated prior to the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise. The importance of digitalisation as the consequence of COVID-19 was correspondingly high and evident. One of the main chal enges was the mobilisation of students, as vocational schools’ students are at school only once a week or in blocks of a few weeks and the time window of the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise was limited to a maximum of 3 weeks. Additional y, the pandemic negatively impacted the cooperation o f in-company trainers and the direct outreach of the school to this specific group is lower. In general, there was a consensus that working with a self-reflection tool like SELFIE makes sense. 1.1.2 Strengths and weaknesses of the SELFIE WBL tool Participants filed out the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise on various devices. The possibility to use smartphones was particularly appreciated, specifical y among students. Further characteristics that work wel were the supporting explanations to questions and the easy handling of the tool. Additional y, the appealing, detailed and colourful user interface, the processing time, the possibility to abstain from answering as wel as the fact that in general the SELFIE WBL process ran smoothly were considered as strengths. Nevertheless, some challenges were identified in displaying larger texts ful y on smartphones and tablets (only in landscape format). Furthermore, the participants pointed out that for such a detailed and lengthy self-reflection exercise it is essential to enable the option of saving the input for later finalisation and the display of the questionnaire should be more appealing. Students considered the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise too time consuming, tiring and unattractive while school coordinators had to consider whether to include the total number of teaching staff or just those teaching in vocation specific fields. In general, the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise should be conducted in the second semester of the study year to al ow students to gain experience and develop their own opinion of the digitalisation situation of the school as wel as the company. Regarding the SELFIE WBL tool registration process it was outlined that the navigation and data input were considered simple, quick and easy. The layout and guidance were very clear and easy to manage. The possibility to customise the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise to the needs of the school by choosing from optional pre-prepared questions and by adding their own, self-created questions were considered the biggest advantage of the SELFIE tool. However, the lack of possibilities to add open questions or to edit any basic information (number of teachers, students, add companies/in-company trainers) once the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise was activated were identified as major weaknesses. The display of the list of companies could be improved by providing an easier way to register al companies they work with. The answer scaling should be displayed neutral y avoiding tendency towards a larger displayed answer. Furthermore, the participants proposed a more detailed scaling than 1 to 5 and an even scaling avoiding the tendency towards the “middle” answer. On the other hand, the generation of a single link to access the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise per target group was welcomed and considered easy and fast. Participation monitoring is ful y and distinctly enabled for each target group. Nevertheless, due to anonymity it is impossible to identify who has not responded yet. The possibility of an automatic reminder could be added to the participation monitoring feature. Technical y the SELFIE WBL tool was easy to manage though difficulties were experienced in the Safari environment. Finaly, most participants assess the SELFIE WBL tool as user-friendly, very easy to use, transparent, with a good structure, wel designed and with a 360-degree reflection. 1.1.3 Questionnaire, content and SELFIE WBL report The overal impression is that the questionnaire was clear, relevant, unambiguous and wel -structured, mapping a variety of areas very wel such as leadership, infrastructure, teaching and learning. Nevertheless, the questions were too long, complex and seemed repetitive (see Annex 4). The questionnaire was considered long, extensive and time consuming. The WBL pilot questionnaire was composed of standard VET questionnaires 8 with additional new items and a new respondent group (in-company trainers) in order to get information also on specific WBL-related items. This made it likely that it was perceived as lengthy, but this was the only way to also test the new WBL items. JRC planned from the start to shorten the questionnaire for the final version. Some questions were irrelevant for some professions. There was a strong demand for more open questions to enable comments, suggestions and experience sharing. Questions integrating communication with parents and family are very much related to primary education and not to vocational schools and should be omitted9. A more noticeable sorting of questions of those related to the school versus those related to the company would be appreciated as the participants found them repetitive. The content was prepared so that the relevant subject areas were very wel mapped, comprehensive, detailed, extensive, diverse and multidimensional to cover a wide range of topics. On the other hand, there was no option of reducing the number of questions as it was too extensive, demanding and tiring for students. The terminology 8 That is, the SELFIE VET questionnaires which are already available in the online SELFIE tool. 9 That is, the questions “Difficulties in supporting families in helping students with remote learning” and “Low digital competence of families”. of questions should be simplified for students. Additional y, as vocational fields differ vastly it would be appreciated to determine the professional field beforehand and only then ask the questions tailored to a specific profession. An option should be provided to evaluate teaching staff individual y as their digitalisation skils are very different, with some stil struggling with basic digital skil s and others being digital y proficient. Participants outlined the necessity for additional topics such as student’s and teacher’s home equipment, internet access and stability (also at home), teacher training and the use of information and communication technology (ICT) in the classroom, digitalisation of schoolbooks, online library, home-schooling vs. face-to-face teaching, and home-schooling in general. SELFIE WBL offers a range of questions addressing those issues among both core and optional questions, so this is a reminder for school coordinators to include those questions that are optional as wel if they have not done so yet. The SELFIE WBL report offers extensive, useful, and clear feedback and documents the current state of digitalisation very wel , identifying strengths and weaknesses. The online report is dynamic and can be operated intuitively. It is a good base for analysis and further development steps. The report offers the school an official document with the reflection of digital processes per specific area and target group. The PDF format is colourful and appealing, yet difficult to understand as question texts are not displayed and some scores are not fuly visible (see Annex 5, areas C and H for in-company trainers, and areas D, E and H for school leaders). The interpretation of results al ows different interpretations (even contradictory ones) and speculations without any previous experience. The dilemma mostly arisen was if the high score in a particular area means the school is performing best in this area or this area is in most need for further development. It would be desirable to have a PDF format with the ful extent of data available as in the online version. The user should have an option to decide whether to download a ful extensive version or a concentrated summary version. In addition, the display of the report is poor on smartphones. Final y, the report clearly highlighted the areas that need further attention and focus. 1.1.4 Current and future use of SELFIE WBL SELFIE WBL clearly exposed the current digital condition and performance with al its strengths and weaknesses. Most schools find the reflection accurate, detailed and somewhat surprising as in some parameters the results were better than expected. This is mostly the case for students’ reflection of the school and teachers’ digitalisation state which were better than teachers and school leaders expected. Although teachers estimated that the cause for a better result was not their good digital skil s but rather the fact that there is no option to indicate the extreme gap among the digital skil s of teachers which emerged and became more evident during the pandemic (some teachers stil struggling with digital basics while others displaying proficient digital performance within the same VET school). Yet in some cases it led to disappointment as the reflections proved to be more critical than expected, especial y regarding students’ skil s in using digital devices and equipment in companies. Based on the SELFIE WBL report the identified future steps for VET schools and companies were to share and discuss the results with al target groups and departments to gain a better and uniform understanding of the result. To analyse those and develop a coherent institutional digital strategy (including an action plan, a sound pedagogical and didactical concept, a feasible financial plan with indicators for reflection of each criteria), further support is needed. Afterwards, it is essential to inform al the relevant target groups including in-company trainers and present the action plan. Solving infrastructural, pedagogical and didactical capacity are identified as urgent priorities. Most schools plan to repeat SELFIE WBL in 1- or 2-years’ time to follow up the impact and progress achieved in the meantime, if the activation timeframe of the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise is prolonged to at least 4 weeks. Nevertheless, there is a strong desire for benchmarking at national and international level to get an impression of their position based on their own quantitative results in various areas and in a broader environment. Furthermore, participants point out the need for support in extracting the correct information from the reports as wel as a platform for good practice sharing. 5.4 Overall findings This chapter presents reflections and main findings from the pilot, gathered from both quantitative and qualitative analyses and the reflections from the participants. School coordinators confirm that the school registration process was considered very easy, smooth, fast and clear once they read the instructions, offering thorough guidance throughout the process. Some confusion arose at defining the total number of teachers and students. Namely, at vocational schools there are two main teaching staff groups – teachers of general subjects and teachers of professional subjects. Some school coordinators inserted the total number of teaching staff and others only the total number of teachers of professional subjects. This resulted in a misleadingly low participation rate (i.e. 18 %) as two schools entered the total number of teachers and sent the generated link only to teachers of professional subjects. Considering only teachers of professional subjects their participation rate easily exceeded 40 % (i.e. 45 %). On the other hand, two schools entered only teachers of professional subjects as the total number of teachers, but sent the generated link to the SELFIE WBL exercise also to teachers of general subjects. Consequently, an impossibly high participation rate was achieved – over 100 %. The same scenario unfolded as wel with the students’ rates in those col eges. Nevertheless, this confusion led to the conclusion that only teachers of professional subjects and vocational students are able to answer profession- and WBL-specific questions adequately. The rigidity in editing data once the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise is activated emerged again in relation to the mobilisation of companies and in-company trainers (see chapter 5.3.1.). Two schools failed to mobilise in-company trainers of the agreed company and as such failed to be included in the quantitative results (see chapter 5.2). However, 10 out of 14 schools considered the registration process, input of data and the generation of links very user friendly and easy and reached the set goals of target group participation. Additional y, the schools commented that to obtain a realistic feedback from in-company trainers, the recommended participation rate of a school’s partner companies should be set to 20 –30 %. Consequently, a substantial number of companies need to be entered during the registration process which adds considerable extra workload. School coordinators identified the option to customise the SELFIE WBL tool as one of the most beneficial features and added 22 own questions. Nevertheless, the preferred form of customised questions are open questions. Additional y, school coordinators reported several obstacles when reaching out to participants to take part in SELFIE WBL. Firstly, the pilot schedule was very intensive with little to no room for launching the SELFIE WBL exercise in a more convenient period for schools. So, the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise was launched immediately at the beginning of the school year. There was very little time for an appropriate and thorough information campaign among the target groups. Secondly, the time of the activated SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise is limited to a maximum of three weeks. This was considered inappropriately short as vocational students are either only once a week at school (the rest of the time they are in companies) or out in companies in blocks of two or three weeks. Thirdly, autumn school holidays interrupted the immediate organisation of the fol ow-up activities. Therefore, the fol ow-up was conducted with a larger time-gap than foreseen and the participants of focus groups and semi-structured interviews claimed they had difficulties recal ing detailed comments. Final y, as much as the first wave of COVID-19 boosted the interest in and importance of digitalisation in spring, the return of the pandemic in autumn resulted in teachers, students and in-company trainers being out of reach due to il ness or quarantine, new measures and restrictions that were imposed, causing stress which resulted in SELFIE WBL drastical y fal ing down the priority list of participants. Consequently, difficulties were encountered in mobilising teachers and students to participate in the focus groups and concentrate on their SELFIE WBL experience. Furthermore, it completely undermined the participation of in-company trainers in semi-structured interviews as companies introduced even stricter measures for their employees. School leaders considered the SELFIE WBL pilot came “just in time” due to the pandemic experience in spring and were therefore highly motivated to establish the state-of-the-art of schools’ digital practices and recognised the added-value of the SELFIE WBL tool in this process. On the other hand, some teachers and students perceived it as an additional burden in difficult times when their main priority was on preparations to remote provision of teaching and learning. On the contrary, most teachers and students were very motivated and looked forward to contributing their opinion on digitalisation to the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise and its results. Students also appreciated the opportunity to spend more time working on computers and discussing the topic of digitalisation. School coordinators organised informational sessions pointing out the benefits of the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise and possible impacts on schools’ digital strategy and practices. Nonetheless, the enthusiasm of most students faded during the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise due to its length, complex terminology, tiring similar questions causing exhaustion and lack of interest. Likewise, teachers’ interest lowered as they were focusing mostly on how to deal with the COVID-19 crisis and remote learning. However, the monitoring of participation was fast, transparent, colourful and simple. Numerous reminder activities were conducted in person, online and per email with little or no result. The lockdown only accelerated the fatigue, stress and disinterest. Participants find the online SELFIE WBL report useful and exhaustive as it pinpoints the expected needs for improvement, like the necessity to improve students’ and teachers’ digital skil s as wel as accessibility to a stable Wi-Fi network. Nevertheless, it also identifies unexpected weaknesses such as poor digital skils of students in profession-specific areas. The report furthermore offers a clear, informative and solid starting point for discussion with al stakeholders (students, teachers, school leader and in-company trainers). Participants agree the online SELFIE WBL report highlighted strengths and weaknesses, yet the PDF format lacks information and as such is prone to various interpretations of results. To be able to discuss the report with the target groups comprehensive feedback on the results would be essential in the PDF version for sharing purposes. The existing PDF version can be used only as a supporting document and for printing. There was also a consensus among schools on the stimulating role of personalised certificates for users and digital badges for schools. Regarding personalised certificates schools reported that they were available and easy to manage. Participants were happy and appreciated them, and school coordinators used them as a motivating instrument and even recognised a promotional opportunity in the certificates. Yet some participants did not pay any attention to them. On the other hand, digital badges proved to be awkward and complicated to manage and register, as the registration had to be conducted with an external platform and it could only be downloaded without text. Schools also reported a long waiting time to receive their digital badges. Some schools identified a good promotional move for their school in the digital badges, others were sceptical as regards their visibility and recognition, and final y there were schools that identified no potential in the digital badges. School leaders unanimously praised the SELFIE WBL tool as being very useful and would recommend it as a powerful self-reflection tool to assess digitalisation status and practices. As a major strength of SELFIE WBL school leaders identify the feature to fol ow the evolution of digitalisation of the school in each of the specified areas upon regular periodical use. SELFIE WBL al ows them to prepare their institutional strategies to be able to document the impact and effectiveness of their action plans approximately every 2 years. School coordinators advocate the need for continuous SELFIE WBL self-reflection as it evidently points to areas the school needs to focus on. An essential activity in the aftermath of SELFIE were presentations of results to target groups and an open dialogue on their interpretation. Teachers and students recognise the usefulness of SELFIE WBL, yet some are sceptical that any actions wil be undertaken by the school leaders. If this wil be the case, there cannot be any added value in repeating the SELFIE WBL self-reflection. Final y, based on the reports, most school leaders identified as a priority for investment the fol owing two areas: implementation of teaching and infrastructure. As a priority activity in the area of infrastructure a stable and accessible Wi-Fi network is mostly planned, and in the area of implementation in teaching reinforced internal courses were organised for staff as wel as for students. Most participants pointed out the inadequacy of questions related to professions. They should be prepared sector-specific to be relevant. Finaly, the SELFIE WBL ecosystem is in its infancy. During the SELFIE WBL pilot a network of 14 pilot schools emerged at national level, creating a good basis for further evolution. The network is used as a platform for sharing good practices and experience, but this dialogue is fal ing short of an important stakeholder, the companies. Based on the SELFIE WBL results schools became aware of the urgent need to include companies into their strategic planning as this lack of engagement with companies proved to be one of their major weaknesses due to their wil ingness to commitment. Each school started also building its own ecosystem with their company partners. The SELFIE WBL pilot raised awareness and led to first discussions among the dual partners. The wil is there but there are stil many difficulties in finding solutions for implementation. Furthermore, the Ministry of Education of Rhineland-Palatinate ensured the support in this process and the dissemination of SELFIE WBL. In conclusion, good foundations were built but further engagement and effort needs to be invested. 6 Lessons learnt and suggestions for future development Meticulous planning is needed to enable the SELFIE WBL process to be implemented smoothly and efficiently. Enough time needs to be envisaged before the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise to present the aim, importance and benefits of SELFIE WBL accustomed to each target group of participants. Pre-prepared SELFIE WBL flyers, certificates for participation and presentations are useful tools for mobilisation of participants. The SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise should take place in the second semester to al ow participants enough time to be able to obtain an insight into the digitalisation status of their school and/or company to answer the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise accurately and with confidence. To ensure representative results from in-company trainers the participation of at least 20-30 % should be achieved. Participants should be informed of the length and complexity of the questionnaire as wel as of the need to read attentively questions that seem repetitive and similar. Only the total number of teachers of professional subjects and the total number vocational students should be entered during the registration process and be invited to take part in SELFIE WBL to ensure relevant responses. To determine the most suitable activation period the availability of vocational students at school and in-company trainers should be verified, and holidays should be avoided (a week before, during and after the activation period). The optional and self-created questions should be thoughtful y selected or designed. Participants should be reminded of the coming SELFIE WBL exercise in the week prior to the activation period and they should be aware that once they begin completing the SELFIE WBL questionnaires there is no option to save or check back information as al information already fil ed in wil be lost. A plan should be prepared for the students within or additional to their existing schedule. During the activation period participation should be regularly monitored and participants reminded. Immediately after the closure of the SELFIE WBL exercise al participants should receive the report. The focus groups and interviews should be scheduled within the week after the SELFIE WBL closure to ensure detailed and relevant feedback from representatives of al target groups. Al col ected feedback should be analysed, an action plan should be developed, agreed with and presented to the participants. This process should be repeated on a regular basis and trends closely fol owed. The above process is based on the experience and lessons learnt during the SELFIE WBL pilot. The COVID-19 pandemic was not considered in the above suggestion of the process as it is an unprecedented event. Nevertheless, it positively influenced the motivation and mobilisation process as participants’ awareness of the importance of digitalisation emerged as a direct consequence of the spring lockdowns and the sudden transition to remote learning and teaching. On the other hand, the autumn pandemic wave substantial y disrupted the implementation of the SELFIE pilot, caused additional stressful situations, and undermined the participation in the fol ow-up focus groups and semi-structured interviews. In general, the SELFIE WBL tool proved to be easily manageable, clear and useful. However, users of the Apple Safari browser experienced difficulties opening the generated link. Smartphones and tablets do not display fuly larger texts, those can only be read in landscape mode. The report is difficult to read on smartphones and participants experienced difficulties selecting a language on smartphones. The size of the displayed five options of the answering scale should be of the same size otherwise participants tend to select the larger one. Additional y, the scale is proposed to have an even number of answers to avoid the tendency towards the middle. Participants appreciated the option to abstain as for some questions they lacked the insight to be able to answer. Two participants reported that part of the questionnaire was in English. Furthermore, no editing of data is possible once the SELFIE WBL exercise is launched which prevents the data from being corrected if a mistake is discovered later on. For the very same reason it is impossible to add a new company if a registered one does not respond. The suggestion in this case is for the school coordinator to take enough time to register al partner companies upon their first use of SELFIE WBL and the benefits of this workload should be made very clear in the introduction phase. Once the participant started to complete the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise it is impossible to save the answers already complete to finalise it later as al data are lost. The same problem arises when the participant goes backwards to check previous answers or if suddenly the internet connection failed, which is extremely demotivating considering the length of the questionnaire. A “save option” or an automatic save solution is urgently needed. The participants find the content of the SELFIE WBL questionnaire extensive, time consuming and tiresome. The participants were confused by questions that seemed repetitive although they were not. And upon going back through the already completed part of the SELFIE WBL questionnaire to verify they lost al the completed answers. Some questions were too long and difficult to comprehend. The terminology used should be simplified for the students as they struggled to understand complex questions. Some participants found some questions confusing whether they are related to the school or to the company. The suggestion is to differentiate such questions with colours. As the questionnaire is already quite extensive very few schools decided to add their own questions. 22 questions in total were added by the schools. Nevertheless, many participants expressed the need for open questions to be able to share practices, experience and provide more detai led answers. Participants indicated the professional y oriented questions as irrelevant depending on the professional sector and suggested to enable an option to select the professional sector with the pre -prepared questions relevant to that sector. Furthermore, the participants expressed the need to differentiate among various teachers as the digitalisation gap within the same school might be extensive (i.e. some teachers struggle with the basic use of MS Office while others proficiently use and work in various professional programmes such as Catia, CAD, CNC). SELFIE WBL does not offer this detailed diversification. The outlay of the SELFIE WBL report is very appealing and dynamic, identifying strengths and weaknesses and providing a good basis for analysis and development. The PDF version provides summary information and question texts are not displayed next to report results making it difficult to understand and interpret the information uniformly. Participants suggest providing in addition to the PDF summary version also the ful report in PDF version so the VET school is able to share comprehensive feedback with other relevant participants. Additional y, the schools expect to be able to compare their results with the national and international average. Final y, participants suggest the report should provide conclusions with recommendations as it would make the interpretation of data easier. SELFIE WBL personalised certificates and digital badges are appreciated by most schools and participants as a motivating factor for participation. Some recognise in them an opportunity for promotion and showcasing. Others are rather sceptical of the added value they bring to the participants and schools. Nevertheless, participants found it easy to download their personalised certificates for participation while schools had to go through a fastidious digital badge registration process and a long wait to receive the school’s digital badge. Therefore, it was proposed that the registration process for digital badges should either be integrated into the SELFIE WBL tool or Europass Digital Credentials (EDC). By integrating both, SELFIE WBL personalised certificates and digital badges, into EDC the added value of both grows and becomes more visible and practical as most VET schools and students have known and used Europass for years. With the SELFIE WBL data, known deficits (hardly any surprises) and development potentials are now available in a report with clear data and in this way objectified. Nevertheless, charts without e xplanation are not very useful and lead to various interpretations and confusion. Therefore, the fol ow-up focus groups and semi-structured interviews proved to be essential for the correct interpretation of the data. Furthermore, they contributed to the awareness and inclusion of al target groups into a dialogue which was a unique, awakening and very beneficial approach providing a 360-degree perspective on digitalisation. Through the fol ow-up activities, information that would have been lost was col ected as participants had the opportunity to explain the results and the reason why they reflected on items as they did. However, it is essential that participants are notified prior to the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise of the fol ow-up activities and that those activities take place immediately after the closure of taking SELFIE WBL (within a week). On the other hand, schools expect to be able to benchmark at national and international level to obtain a notion of how these data project on a wider scale. Yet, SELFIE WBL is a self-reflection tool, not an external evaluation one, and benchmarking data without background information, critical understanding and thought given to it might lead to misinterpretations. Therefore, a benchmarking opportunity is welcomed only after coherent guidelines are provided on the extent of interpretation and understanding these benchmarking criteria. With the much appreciated inclusion of al target groups into SELFIE WBL, a micro ecosystem was built at individual school level. Namely, each school is a micro system on its own, but to become a micro ecosystem the stakeholders within the system need not only to assume each other’s opinions and beliefs, they have to discuss and understand each other’s views to be prepared to act successful y as an ecosystem towards improvements. The strengths and weaknesses in the field of digitalisation and digital education with regard to training companies have emerged for the first time. In vocational schools, in-company trainers are an additional stakeholder that was mostly overlooked as such, and this weakness was wel recognised by taking a SELFIE. In most cases there is no existing systemic approach to dialogue with in-company trainers. The need to establish one emerged and schools are searching for good practice examples to implement in this area and solve issues, like students receiving a digital device from the company but being unable to use it on an external network due to operational requirements and similar. Therefore, SELFIE WBL contributed to strengthening the school’s inner micro ecosystem and contributed to broadening it to the immediate local and regional level by introducing companies (through in-company trainers) as a new stakeholder of their micro ecosystem. On the other hand, through the SELFIE WBL pilot a national ecosystem emerged composed of 14 schools sharing their experience and struggles through the pilot phase. This national ecosystem has high potential to grow into a community of practice for schools on digitalisation but has a rather low potential to influence national policies. The reason for this is that Germany’s governance of education is highly decentralised and is not in the domain of the Federal Government but in the domain of the federal states. State education ministries support vocational schools, while the funding for the apprenticeship system comes from the private sector. This is why the SELFIE WBL ecosystem should initiate policy impact at state rather than national level. Some states (e.g. Rhineland-Palatinate) already expressed their support for further cooperation. They have established school quality frameworks which, however, do not focus on digitalisation. Consequently, school coordinators fear the multiplication of self-reflection tools with diverse focus. On the other hand, some state ministries are stil standing firm on their current requirements that students’ results of remote learning are formal y irrelevant, although much can be taken from the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise in the area of evaluation and assessment of students’ achievements during remote learning. Therefore, further efforts wil have to take place to update their framework conditions in order to see sustainable progress and SELFIE WBL may play a pivotal role in doing so. 7 Implications of COVID-19 pandemic It is evident that the pandemic wave in spring of 2020 stimulated awareness that digitalisation of schools is a subject that should be prioritised now, and not sometime in the future. Even most teaching staff that stil hoped to escape the digital era prior to retirement and policy makers who avoided the discussion of a strategy and urgent investments into digitalisation of schools had to take notice as immediate solutions were demanded. Therefore, the pandemic accelerated the digitalisation process as the immediate response was very much left to individuals who could rely only on their own skil s, knowledge and technical predispositions and were forced to solve issues in the sense of “as you see fit”. There was mostly no uniform approach in how to approach remote learning overnight. It has to be taken into consideration that students at vocational schools spend less time at school, as some spend only one day per week, others spend a block of a few weeks in companies and a few weeks at school, and consequently the spring pandemic left a very different impact on their remote learning experience. Some of them were hardly impacted, again others had quite a good insight into the experience. Students also reported that apprenticeships have been adapted during the lockdown, resulting in increased email correspondence, more video conferences with only occasional learning at the workplace for which they had to undergo a safety briefing fol owed by a test. Some reported difficulties as work from home did not alow them to work in licensed software outside the company, and they did not have two or more monitors at home which made their apprenticeship chal enging. In the aftermath of the spring pandemic, it became even more evident that the technical equipment alone does not guarantee a smooth transition to digitalisation or even remote learning proficiency. The lack of teachers’ skil s of using technology and software proved to be insufficient, and this only aggravated when they encountered errors or any other technical obstacles. The latter proved to be one of the major chal enges for teachers as wel as students during lockdown, the major being accessibility and stability of internet. Consequently, it is important to have appropriate technical equipment (software, hardware and Wi-Fi) but it is fundamental that teachers as wel as students learn how to use it confidently, and also how to work around minor obstacles when the equipment fails to work appropriately (i.e. regular upgrades, restarting the computer, …). Therefore, some schools redrafted their frameworks, teachers have been trained and adapted and developed their lessons accordingly, MS Teams was introduced as a uniform solution to remote teaching and learning, and students received a school email address and their own Microsoft 365 account (anonymised) to easily facilitate remote learning for al teachers and students. This resulted in students clearly expressing that the school has made noticeable digital progress during the pandemic period. For most schools SELFIE WBL came just in time as there is no uniform approach to digitalisation at institutional level and teaching staff need guided training. Young col eagues in particular work with smartphone tools such as Kahout because (usual y) al students have smartphones. Students openly recognise the emerging necessity to use more and diverse digital devices in class and the need for further training for teachers in this area. In many schools the digital readiness gap between teachers of general subjects and those of profession-oriented subjects clearly emerged. It was suggested either to omit the teachers of general subjects completely from the SELFIE WBL exercise, or offer the possibility of two teachers’ subgroups. The digital knowledge, skil s and competences of teachers of professional subjects comprises profound insight and expertise in specific digital tools and the use of those for their profession, which mostly completely differ from those digital tools for general subjects used (and widely available and accessible). The lockdown lessons highlighted the importance of digitalisation on the one hand, but also the need for social interaction during and outside learning processes on the other. Additional y, the self-competence of the students regarding time-management, self-learning strategies and motivation proved to be very low. Students as wel as teachers have been spending long hours every day at their digital devices during the lockdown. The disparities between low and high achievers become even more evident and the need for more exchanges between felow students as wel as fel ow teachers are required during lockdown. The human informal contact with peers was not addressed and completely forgotten. Schools are not just about learning; at this age they are the social metropolis for most students. For some students this was the only bright time in the day when they have escaped a dysfunctional home atmosphere. And during the lockdown the tensions in such homes only intensified and led to depression, anxiety, stress and/or dropout. In consequence, new roles are being given to the teacher: in addition to the pedagogical and didactical knowledge of methods and lesson organisation in remote learning also the role of online social and psychological support to students. Al those concepts have not been sufficiently addressed nor developed yet, which evidently cal s for a coherent institutional strategy. A great deal of further training and motivation for teachers wil be necessary. Additional y, a lot should be learned and developed on time-management during remote learning, as it is unacceptable for teachers and students to be overwhelmed with work for more hours than their normal workload demands. Nevertheless, the pandemic has strengthened the relationship and bond among staff as a result of dealing with struggles, difficulties and the opportunities of digital education. On the other hand, some schools postponed the digitalisation agenda due to the second pandemic wave and prioritised enabling teaching, learning, social and psychological support, and the associated effort of the school staff and management. The SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise, report, results and future actions based on them were given only low priority due to momentary lack of capacity. Undoubtedly, this is the major negative influence of the pandemic as many put aside their efforts on the development of digitalisation due to limited capacity during the second pandemic wave, which resulted in low capacity to organise and attend focus groups and interviews. Nevertheless, al schools that were able to respond decided to take the SELFIE WBL self-reflection in one-, two- or three-years’ time. Finaly, the pandemic has thoroughly changed al our lives and habits and many changes are here to stay, which means that to some extent al professions are experiencing changes. What are those changes and how to include the knowledge to be able to address those changes in curricula for each specific profession? The whole extent of the aftermath of the pandemic is yet to be established but we can certainly confirm already now that it wil be much profounder and long-lasting than expected. 8 Conclusions and recommendations The SELFIE WBL pilot is considered to have come “just in time” due to the pandemic experience in spring 2020. Participants were highly motivated to establish the state-of-the-art of school’s digital status, practices and recognised the added value of the SELFIE WBL tool in this process. The SELFIE WBL tool is assessed as user-friendly, very easy to use, transparent, with a good structure, wel designed, and al owing an inclusive 360-degree reflection. SELFIE WBL was tested on various devices. Minor difficulties were encountered on smartphones and on Apple Safari browser. Supporting explanations to questions and the easy handling of the tool were praised as wel as the appealing, detailed and colourful user interface, the processing time, the possibility to abstain from answering and the fact that in general the SELFIE WBL self-reflection process ran smoothly. On the other hand, the maximum activation time of a SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise of 3 weeks was unanimously considered too short due to the limited time vocational students are at school and the inability to edit any registration data during the exercise. There is no possibility to save input and continue fil ing in the questionnaires later as it was considered too time consuming, tiring and unattractive. The SELFIE team has long been aware of this issue but technicaly it is currently not possible to address it. The possibility to customise the questionnaires to their own needs was considered the great advantage of the SELFIE tool. However, as a weakness the lack of possibility to add open questions was identified as wel as the lack of possibility to edit any information once the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise is activated. The answer scaling had a tendency towards a larger displayed answer and towards the “middle” answer. The registration process, navigation and data input were considered simple, quick and easy. The layout and guidance were very clear and simply manageable and generating a single link to access the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise per target group was welcomed. The questionnaire was clear, relevant, unambiguous and wel -structured, mapping a variety of areas very wel . Nevertheless, the questions were too long, complex and seemed repetitive. The questionnaire was considered long, extensive and time consuming. Some questions were irrelevant for some professions. The SELFIE WBL report offers extensive, useful, clear feedback and is exclusively available only to the school. The results al ow different interpretations, which clearly requires further support to be able to come to conclusions and recommendations. Some were clarified through the fol ow-up focus groups and interviews. Certificates were available and easy to manage while digital badges proved to be awkward, complicated to manage and register. The SELFIE team has been working on an easier, user-friendly, and automatic new system to generate open badges for schools which wil go live around mid-2021. The SELFIE WBL ecosystem is in its infancy. Final y, the national ecosystem has high potential to grow, but further engagement and effort need to be invested. Schools expect to be able to benchmark at national and international level to obtain notions of how these data project on a wider scale. Most schools plan on repeating SELFIE WBL in 1- or 2-years’ time to folow up the impact and progress achieved in the meantime. School leaders unanimously praised the SELFIE WBL tool as being very useful and would recommend it as a unique powerful self-reflection tool. Recommendations: - Due to the specific schedule of vocational schools, the prolongation of the maximum activation period of the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise to 4 weeks is required. - The SELFIE WBL summary PDF report should be more tangible. Additional y, it is recommended to create a ful PDF report for sharing, offering the user an option to decide whether to download a ful extensive version or a concentrated summary PDF version. - Due to the possibility of various interpretations, it is proposed to offer further support on how to translate report results into conclusions, recommendations and final y into an institutional action plan, or integrate conclusions and recommendations already as part of report. - The SELFIE WBL pilot raised awareness and led to first discussions among the dual partners. Yet more effort should be dedicated to explaining the benefits to companies. - The simplification of the registration process of companies with a single generated link for in -company trainers is proposed in order to ensure representative results from in-company trainers reaching the participation rate of 20-30 %. - Information on possible difficulties when taking part in the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise through the Apple Safari browser (incompatible) and on smartphones and tablets (longer texts are not fuly displayed) should be provided if the issues are not solved by that time. - Some questions were found confusing (i.e. whether they are related to the school or to the company). Therefore, a noticeable visual effect is suggested to differentiate such questions by colour. - Open questions are desired to enable participants to ful y express their opinion (e.g. to be able to share comments, suggestions and experience). - Participation monitoring is ful y and distinctly enabled for each target group. Nevertheless, an automatic reminder for coordinators would be appreciated. - The SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise should take place in the second semester of the study year to al ow participants enough time to be able to obtain an insight on the digitalisation status to answer the questionnaires accurately and with confidence. - The answer scale should be displayed neutral y, avoiding tendency towards a larger displayed answer as wel as an even scaling avoiding the tendency towards the “middle” answer. - The questionnaire should be shorter, and questions simplified, avoiding repetitive similar questions with the terminology adapted for students. Furthermore, questions very much related to primary school should be omitted10. - Professional fields differ vastly, and it would be appreciated to determine the professional field beforehand, and afterwards ask the questions tailored to a specific profession. - Benchmarking on local, regional, national and EU level would be very welcomed, not as a ranking list but rather a comparison tool against the average with coherent guidelines on the extent of interpretation and understanding these benchmarking might al ow. - The registration process for badges should either be integrated into SELFIE WBL tool or Europass Digital Credentials (EDC). By integrating both, SELFIE WBL certificates and badges, into EDC, the added value of both grows and becomes more evident and practical as most VET schools and students have known and used Europass for years. - The need was expressed to provide an option to differentiate teachers, as the digitalisation gap among them within the same school might be extensive. - Topics like student’s and teacher’s home equipment, internet access and stability at home, teacher training and the use of ICT in the classroom, digitalisation of schoolbooks, online library, home-schooling vs. face-to-face teaching, and home-schooling in general should be answered or selected by school coordinators from the pool of provided core and optional questions. - The SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise is lengthy, so a “save option” or an “automatic save” solution to enable later finalisation should be enabled without loss of previous input. - The editing of registration data during the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise without resetting the whole process and losing already received questionnaires should be enabled. - Due to the specificities of state governance of education in Germany, the SELFIE WBL ecosystem should initiate policy impact at state rather than national level. Based on EU documents signed during the German presidency to incentivise digitalisation in VET, a specific national initiative would also be expected. - The whole extent of the aftermath of the pandemic is yet to be established but we can certainly confirm already now that it wil be much more profound and long-lasting than expected. SELFIE WBL should also encompass the emerged changes due to the pandemic that influenced professions, and as a result the new digital knowledge and skil s. These new knowledge and skil s need to be identified to be able to integrate them into curricula of each specific profession. 10 That is, the questions “Difficulties in supporting families in helping students with remote learning” and “Low digital competence of families” References Bildungsserver. (2021). BBS-Standortatlas Rheinland-Pfalz. Standorte, Namen und Internetseiten öffentlicher berufsbildender Schulen oder privater berufsbildender Ersatzschulen. (Agrarwirtschaftliche Schulen). Available: www.bbs-rlp.de Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. Available: http:/ dx.doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Bundesinstitut für Berufsbildung. (2019). Dual VET, Vocational Education and Training in Germany. BIBB. Available: https:/ www.govet.international/en/54880.php Bundesinstitut für Berufsbildung. (2020a). Verzeichnis der anerkannten Ausbildungsberufe 2020. BIBB. Available: https:/ www.bibb.de/veroeffentlichungen/de/publication/show/16754 Bundesinstitut für Berufsbildung. (2020b). Young people study in the company and at school. BIBB. Available: https:/ www.bibb.de/en/77203.php Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. (2019). Digitale Zukunft: Lernen. Forschen. Wissen. Die Digitalstrategie des BMBF. BMBF. Available: https:/ www.bmbf.de/upload_filestore/pub/BMBF_Digitalstrategie.pdf Die Bundesregierung. (2020). Strategie Künstliche Inteligenz der Bundesregierung Fortschreibung 2020 Stand. Available: https:/ germandigitaltechnologies.de/national-strategies/ CEDEFOP. (2018). Apprenticeship schemes in European countries. Luxembourg: Publications Office. Available: http:/ data.europa.eu/doi/10.2801/722857 CEDEFOP. (2020). Digital gap during COVID-19 for VET learners at risk in Europe. Synthesis report on seven countries based on preliminary information provided by Cedefop’s Network of Ambassadors tackling early leaving from VET. Available: https:/ www.cedefop.europa.eu/files/digital_gap_during_covid-19.pdf CEDEFOP. (2016). Germany. Understanding of apprenticeships in the national context. Available: https:/ www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/publications-and-resources/data-visualisations/apprenticeship- schemes/country-fiches/germany Commission Recommendation of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, smal and medium-sized enterprises. (2003). Official Journal, L 124, 36-41. Available: https:/ eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32003H0361 European Commission. (2020). SELFIE database, special extraction for SELFIE WBL national coordinators. European Commission. (2020). Anonymous SELFIE WBL school report. Figgou, L. & Pavlopoulos, V. (2015). Social Psychology: Research Methods. In: International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition), Elsevier, Pages 544-552. Available: https:/ www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pi /B9780080970868240282 German Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training. (2021). Young people study in the company and at school. Available: https:/ www.bibb.de/en/77203.php German Office for International Cooperation in Vocational Education and Training. (2019). Dual VET. Vocational Education and training in Germany. Available: https:/ www.govet.international/dokumente/pdf/govet_praesentation_dual_vet_Nov_2019_en.pdf Initiative D21. (2019). Digital Index 2018/2019. Kantar TNS. Available: https:/ initiatived21.de/app/uploads/2019/01/d21_index2018_2019.pdf Kulturminister Konferenz. (2019). Federal-State Agreement: Digital School Pact 2019-24, 06 May 2019, Berlin. Available: https:/ www.digitalpaktschule.de/files/VV_DigitalPaktSchule_Web.pdf Majchrzak, A. (1990). Methods for policy research. Applied social research methods series. v.3. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications. Plecher, H. (2020). Share of economic sectors in gross domestic product in Germany 2019. Available: https:/ www.statista.com/statistics/295519/germany-share-of-economic-sectors-in-gross-domestic- product/ Ragin, Charles C. (2007). Družboslovno raziskovanje: enotnost in raznolikost metode. Ljubljana: Fakulteta za družbene vede. SAGE Publications. 2019. Thematic Analysis of Survey Responses from Undergraduate Students. SAGE Research Methods Datasets. Available: https:/ methods.sagepub.com/base/download/DatasetStudentGuide/thematic-analysis-students- technology Skupnost VSŠ. (2020). Guide and Work Plan for National Coordinators. Available: https:/www.skupnost- vss.si/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Guidelines-and-Work-Plan-for-National-Coordinators_V5.pdf Skupnost VSŠ. (2021). SELFIE WBL Germany – Preliminary Results. Available: https:/www.skupnost-vss.si/wp- content/uploads/2021/03/DE.pptx SPIRIT Slovenija. 2020. Gospodarske panoge Nemčije. Available: https:/ www.izvoznookno.si/drzave/nemcija/gospodarske-panoge/ The Federal Government. (2014). Digital Agenda for Germany. (2014). Available: https:/ www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/downloads/EN/publikationen/2014/digital- agenda.pdf?__blob=publicationFile List of abbreviations and definitions BBSW Berufsbildende Schule Wirtschaft/Vocational school of economy BIBB German Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training BMBF German Federal Ministry of Education and Research CEDEFOP The European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training CPD Continuing professional development EfVET European Forum of Technical and Vocational Education and Training ETF European Training Foundation ICT Information and communication technology JRC Joint Research Centre, European Commission N Number of valid responses from the respondents M Mean - the average/central value of the data points or numbers SD Standard deviation - a measure of the dispersion of a dataset relative to its mean Skupnost VSŠ Skupnost višjih strokovnih šol Republike Slovenije/Association of Slovene Higher Vocational Col eges SME Smal and medium-sized enterprises STEM Science, technology, engineering and mathematics TEL Technology Enhanced Learning ÜBS Überbetriebliche Berufsbildungsstätten/Intercompany vocational training centres VET Vocational education and training WBL Work-based learning List of figures Figure 1. Selection criteria for VET schools. 9 Figure 2. The diversity of selected VET schools according to size, location and programme area. 10 Figure 3. The diversity of selected VET schools and companies according to geographical coverage. 11 Figure 4. Selection criteria for companies. 11 Figure 5. Selected companies per selection criteria. 12 Figure 6. Translation process. 13 Figure 7. Implementation process. 14 Figure 8. Percentage of positive responses by area. 19 Figure 9. Mean overal score for overal satisfaction with SELFIE WBL by respondent group. 20 Figure 10. German dual vocational education and training. 45 Figure 11. The Digital Strategy. 47 Figure 12. Distribution of economic sectors in Germany. 49 Figure 13. Overview of areas snapshot from the school report. 62 Figure 14. Mean score for al variables in main areas by respondent group. 64 Figure 15. Mean likelihood for further recommendation of SELFIE. 66 Figure 16: Negative factors for technology use in school and company – percentage by respondent group. 67 Figure 17. Negative factors for technology use for remote teaching, learning and training – percentage by respondent group. 68 Figure 18. Positive factors for remote teaching, learning and training – percentage by respondent group. 69 List of Tables Table 1. Descriptive statistics for main areas by respondent group. 20 Table 2. The number of students, teachers, school leaders, in-company trainers and school coordinators involved in the qualitative analysis. 23 Table 3. Thematic analysis of open question responses by students 60 Table 4. Overal satisfaction with SELFIE - percentage distribution by respondent group. 65 Table 5. Relevance of questions by respondent group. 65 Table 6. Likelihood for further recommendation of SELFIE tool - percentage by respondent group. 66 Annexes Annex 1. Key information on the WBL system Annex 2. Dominant economic sectors in Germany Annex 3. Guidelines and templates for focus groups, semi-structured interviews and list of chal enges Annex 4. Analysis of open question “Suggestions for improvement” and examples of questions Annex 5. School report “Overview by area” Annex 6. Figures and tables of SELFIE WBL piloting quantitative analysis Annex 7. Overview of SELFIE WBL results in Germany Annex 8. Country fiche Annex 9. List of tools similar to SELFIE and other tools used in WBL Annex 1. Key information on the WBL system WORK-BASED LEARNING IN GERMANY The vocational education and training system in Germany is based on the dual system, which forms the core element of vocational training. Every young person who has completed ful -time compulsory school has access to dual training having no further requirements. This training pathway is characterised by two learning venues, namely companies and vocational schools, covering al economic and programme sectors. The Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training (BIBB), responsible for the overal management of the dual system in Germany, stresses that the dual system is at the heart of the German VET system. BIBB and the German Office for International Cooperation in Vocational Education and Training provides a very detailed explanation of the system's different aspects on its website, some of which wil be described here with the purpose of providing an overview of how the dual system works on a practical level in Germany and to provide an overview of the most up to date figures. The dual system in Germany offers the possibility for young people to further advance their studies either on initial tertiary education anywhere in Germany or to further explore other vocational education and training anywhere in Germany. Figure 10. German dual vocational education and training. Source: BIBB, 2020b. Overal, there is a colective recognition of the positive contribution of dual systems to economic performance and competitiveness; the skil s match to market needs (employers/employees) and a third dimension of critical importance, the social and economic integration of young people (inclusiveness). The dual training provides a high level of employment security (96.4 % of Dual VET graduates employed; only 82.1 % employed among untrained people) and data shows that 74 % of Dual VET trainees are hired as temporary or permanent employees after training (BIBB, 2019). The expenditure made by companies is shared with the government whose investment is split between the public vocational schools providing part-time VET and the steering, monitoring and other supporting measures. BIBB states that the return of the investment made by companies in the dual system, stating that 70 % of investment is refinanced by the productive contribution of trainees during the training period (BIBB, 2019). Overal, there is a common recognition of the contribution of the dual systems to the strength of SME competitiveness on international markets and its contribution to the low youth unemployment rate (estimated at 4.7 % in early 2019) (BIBB, 2019). There are two main components in the VET dual-track system namely: classroom study in specialised trade schools and supervised on-the-job work experience. Over the course of 2 to 3 years, on average, apprentices spend a few days a week, or even blocks of several weeks at a time, at a vocational school ( Berufsschule) where they obtain theoretical knowledge of their occupation of choice. At the same time, a company or public sector institution hosts the apprentices where they gain practical knowledge and hands-on experience. The apprentices usual y spend 60 % of their time in the workplace under the supervision of a certified trainer, and 40 % in the classroom (BIBB, 2019). The Dual VET certificate is issued by chamber organisations and it is nationaly recognised by the government. The dual system in Germany is characterised by a multi-stakeholder approach where the business community, social partners and government are involved in supervision, monitoring and support. It should also be mentioned that the dual VET standards are based on requirements of the world of work, meaning that in articulation with BIBB the dual offer is analysed based on the needs of the market, which is provided by the employers, and based on this information the social partners and the government negotiate and adopt new standards for in-company training (training regulations) under the guidance of BIBB. This then leads to a process whereby the educational standards (educational frameworks) are reviewed and updated accordingly. Al dimensions of the dual system are framed by a system of laws, examples of which are: Protection of Young People at Work Act; Trade and Crafts Code; Col ective Agreements Act; Act on the Provisional Settlement of the Regulations Governing the Chambers of Industry and Commerce; Compulsory Education Law; regional school laws; joint agreement on coordination of training regulations and framework curricula. Even though chalenges are stil faced by the dual system (BIBB, 2019), its strengths and consistency are recognised across Europe as a result of different factors such as: - Long-standing history of Dual VET; - Highly developed economic structure translates into high demand for skil ed employees on the labour market; - Strong smal and medium-sized enterprises (SME); - Interest, commitment and capability of companies to train; - Strong and competent representation of employer and employee interests (chamber organisations/labour unions); - Broad-based acceptance of VET standards through strong involvement of social partners in VET and culture of cooperative engagement; - Strong regulatory capacity of government; - Competent VET teachers and trainers; - General education system makes young people ready for VET. DIGITALISATION STRATEGY FOR VET AND WBL IN GERMANY The Digital Strategy in Germany was officialy launched in 2014 (with the first Agenda launched for the period 2014-2017) and has, from its very beginning, focused on the development of a holistic and humanistic approach where individuals are at the core of al initiatives in recognition that the skil s and abilities of each and every individual wil serve the future and capacity to innovate of Germany and Europe (The Federal Government, 2014). The strategy acknowledges the fast pace by which technology is changing the ways people work, live and think and the need to respond to these changes. The digital strategy is directly linked to other strategic measures and seen, as mentioned, from a holistic perspective bringing together al key actors from different sectors. It focuses on five main fields of action: digital competence, infrastructure and equipment; innovation and digital transformation, society in digital change and modern state initiatives, entailing cross-cutting actions linked to safety and equality in terms of access - understood as a dynamic process in the sense of open dialogue to meet the chal enges of the digital change together. In the field of education and training, the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) emphasises the investment already made in the improvement of digital education and training in al educational institutions as a way of helping schoolchildren, teachers and trainers, trainees and students, employees and non-employees across generations to become digital y competent. Even though an increase in basic skil s in computer applications and internet skil s has been observed (Initiative D21, 2019)11 these are only moderately spread and there is stil a labour gap not only in the academic world but also in the workforce. Figure 11. The Digital Strategy. Source: BMBF, 2019. Different milestones have been set and several initiatives have been (and are planned to be) taken at VET level, together with the federal states and other relevant actors to help people of al generations become digitaly competent, acknowledging that digital skil s are acquired and expanded in vocational and academic education, 11 The large society study D21-Digital-Index provides an annual picture of the digitalisation of society in Germany. Almost 20,500 German citizens aged 14 and over, including those who are offline, are surveyed. in the job itself and in adult (continuous) education. The details of these milestones and initiatives can be found on the government website where the key national strategies issued over the past five years are published (Die Bundesregierung, 2020). With the purpose of strengthening digital education and training, BMBF has set the milestone of increasing the percentage of people who have basic skil s by 2025 from 68 % to 75 %, for which the fol owing initiatives wil be either continued or implemented (BMBF, 2019): - Vocational Education 4.0; - STEM Action Plan; - Digital media in vocational training and basic digital education. Aiming at supporting the continuous transition of the educational system into the digital age, BMBF has set additional milestones related to the need to assure al educational and training institutions are appropriately equipped with efficient learning infrastructures. Initiatives such as the School Cloud, Digitalisation of inter-company educational places, Online applications for education-related state Services and Education register are examples of this support (BMBF, 2019). In addition to the above, the Digital Pact (Kulturminister Konferenz, 2019), another initiative launched in 2016, aims at assuring schools and training institutions are properly resourced and have the financial support to do it. This funding is available to al types of schools who can apply for this support. The goal is to support the development of a modern digital learning infrastructure nationwide. The milestones regarding the transition of (VET) training systems into the digital age have been set as folows: ✔ With the support of the Digital Pact, al schools aiming at becoming digital wil be supported with equipment and wil become digital by 2025. ✔ With the special programme of digitalisation inter-company training centres (ÜBS) wil be equipped with digital technologies for modern, high-quality and flexible training for skil ed workers. One other initiative that wil benefit – indirectly – al educational sectors including VET is related to further support and training of expert in education who understand big data management. This wil enable the further development of secure digital educational spaces, some of which related to VET and job integration (BMBF, 2019). Annex 2. Dominant economic sectors in Germany Gross domestic product (GDP) structure Figure 12. Distribution of economic sectors in Germany. Source: SPIRIT Slovenija, 2020. Agricultural sector The German agricultural sector contributes 1 % of GDP and employs 1.3 % of the workforce. The main agricultural crops are milk, pork, potatoes, sugar beet, wheat and barley. According to the National Statistics Office, there are around 275,000 agricultural holdings in Germany, most of which are self-employed. Service sector The service sector contributes 69 % of GDP and is the leading employer in the country, employing 71.9% of the workforce. The growth of the service sector in recent years has been mainly due to the high demand for business services and the development of new technologies. The German economy is heavily dependent on a wide network of smal and medium-sized enterprises linked to the international environment. Industrial sector The industrial sector generates 30 % of GDP and employs 26.9 % of the German workforce. Germany is the most industrialised country in Europe and its economy is very diverse. The industrial sector is dominated by the automotive industry, while other important industries are the machine industry, the production of electrical and electronic equipment and the chemical industry. Source: SPIRIT Slovenija. 2020. Annex 3. Guidelines and templates for focus groups, semi-structured interviews and list of challenges Focus Group Guidelines Objective The main objective of the focus groups is to spend some time with each of the two key target groups for the SELFIE WBL project - learners and teachers - and to discuss the “how” and “why” behind the main questions and answers of the survey. We want participants to elaborate further on the key questions of the survey (Pilot of SELFIE WBL tool) and explore participants’ views about the tool, the main chal enges they faced in using SELFIE tool and whether it helps them assess where they stand with learning in the digital age. We want them to speak freely and not be swayed by pre-conceived notions they may have about what are deemed desirable answers as there are no wrong answers. Moderators The focus group for teaching staff should be moderated by a peer teacher and the focus group for learners should be moderated by a tutor to create a comfortable and trustful atmosphere which enables open reflection and discussion. We advise that a note-taker is also assigned to each moderator to enable fluent moderation. Participants Each VET school organises two focus groups. One exclusively with teachers as participants and the other with learners. The diversity in terms of school’s size shal be taken into account. The only pre-condition to becoming a participant is that they have taken part in the SELFIE WBL pilot survey. The optimal size of each focus group is 10 participants which al ows al members to participate, and enables the moderator, i.e. institutional coordinator or learners’ tutor time to be able to tease out the nuance behind participants’ answers. For online focus groups where plenary discussions/interactions are less straightforward a slightly lower number of participants (minimum of 5) is acceptable to ensure there is opportunity for al participants to have their say, remain engaged and reduce strain on the moderator. Duration Typical y, a focus group lasts between 60–90 minutes. This gives enough time to al ow for deeper conversations to take place but does not run too long which can lead to participant fatigue. In the case of online focus groups, it is advisable to keep the session time to maximum 60 minutes as it is just that little bit harder for people to stay focused. Moderation The focus group wil need to be wel moderated in order to guide the discussion, using a combination of questions and further probes. The participants should be encouraged to interact with each other as wel as to generate deeper insights about the different subtopics. With an online focus group, it is probably not possible to get the same type of feedback or interplay between participants as with face-to-face focus groups, so the role of the moderator is even more important here. The moderator wil give an overview of the project and its purpose, ask questions, fol ow up with more questions, and keep the conversation on track and on subject. Make sure to keep it relaxed so that participants are at ease and feel comfortable and safe in opening and sharing their thoughts. Reminding participants that there are no right or wrong answers is a good way to make sure they are not self-censoring. Make sure that the moderator also takes enough time for introductions and for participants to become comfortable in the session to al ow individuals to engage with one another. Normal y, al discussions can take place in a normal plenary form, but if the moderator feels the need for it, they might use smal exercises like brainstorm activities in which the participants write down ideas on (virtual) post-it notes, plotting these post-it notes in a matrix or map to prioritise items, or simply keeping track of inspiration and solutions that come up during the session in a visual way. Topics/questions Based on experience with similar focus groups, we should have time to address three to four different topics with open-ended questions, fol ow-up questions and, especial y, discussion between participants. The topics that we would suggest are: The strengths and weaknesses of the SELFIE WBL tool Questions to the participants can include: - What works particularly wel in SELFIE tool? What does not? - What would you see as the most important chal enges for an optimal functioning SELFIE tool? Discussion should be encouraged comparing different situations, shared experiences regarding strengths and weaknesses, concrete tips & tricks on how to make improvements. Discussion on relevant survey results Participants wil reflect and discuss their interpretation and in-depth understanding of the relevant survey results, for example going into different elements of the SELFIE tool (e.g. Leadership, Infrastructure and Equipment, Teaching and Learning, etc.). Further fol ow-up questions can be asked about the reasons why they took part in the SELFIE survey, if it is optimal or more out of necessity and if there are intentions to become either more or less involved in SELFIE tool in the future. Areas where further support is needed/useful Questions to the participants can include: − What are the areas of SELFIE tool where more information, knowledge, guidance, training etc. would be welcome for them and/or col eagues in similar roles? − What potential changes do you anticipate based on the survey results? Again, discussion should be encouraged comparing different situations, experiences and visions. Equipment/facilities Chairs arranged in a circular pattern around a table is the most ideal set-up for a focus group as you want al the participants to be able to easily see each other. In case of an online focus group, a Zoom room can be set up by the Research Team (contact us12 at least one week prior to the event providing exact date and timeslot). The amount of information that is shared in focus groups is not easily captured by a note-taker, as there are numerous side conversations that happen. The best way to scrutinise data at a later time is to audio and video record the focus group sessions. Please do not forget to get consent from the participants to be recorded and let them know their responses wil remain anonymous and no names wil be mentioned in the report. 12 Research Team contacts: miha.zimšek@skupnost-vss.si and/or alicia.miklavcic@skupnost-vss.si. Focus Group Report Date: Country: School: Moderator(s): Participant First Name and Surname Teacher/Student Subject/Programme 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Discussion Topics - Discussion 1: Icebreakers - Discussion 2: The strengths and weaknesses of the SELFIE WBL tool - Discussion 3: Discussion on relevant survey results - Discussion 4: Areas where further support is needed/useful Topic 1: Icebreakers Suggestions for discussion: Questions to the participants can include: - What were your expectations of Selfie WBL? - Do you think your expectations were met? Common responses/general consensus: Areas of disagreement/lack of consensus: Other notes & observations Topic 2: The strengths and weaknesses of the SELFIE WBL tool Suggestions for discussion: Questions to the participants can include: - What works particularly wel in SELFIE WBL tool? What does not? - What would you see as the most important chal enges for an optimal functioning SELFIE WBL tool? Discussion should be encouraged comparing different situations, shared experiences regarding strengths and weaknesses, concrete tips & tricks on how to make improvements. Common responses/general consensus: Areas of disagreement/lack of consensus: Other notes & observations Topic 3: Discussion on relevant survey results Suggestions for discussion: Participants wil reflect and discuss their interpretation and in-depth understanding of the relevant survey results, for example going into different elements of SELFIE WBL tool (e.g. Leadership, Infrastructure and Equipment, Teaching and Learning etc.). Further fol ow-up questions can be asked about the reasons why they took part in the SELFIE survey, if it is optimal or more out of necessity and if there are intentions to become either more or less involved in SELFIE WBL tool in the future. Common responses/general consensus: Areas of disagreement/lack of consensus: Other notes & observations Topic 4: Areas where further support is needed/useful Suggestions for discussion: Questions to the participants can include: − What are the areas of SELFIE WBL tool where more information, knowledge, guidance, training etc. would be welcome for them and/or col eagues in similar roles? − What potential changes do you anticipate based on the survey results? − What kind of technology are you using when you are working in the company? (state specific examples about the use of technology in company and in school?) − Did you start with digital learning because of COVID-19? − What problems did you face because of COVID-19? − Did you include blended learning? − Did you perform apprenticeships during the lockdown (remote mode/distance mode)? − Wil you use SELFIE WBL in the future? Again, discussion should be encouraged comparing different situations, experiences and visions. Common responses/general consensus: Areas of disagreement/lack of consensus: Other notes & observations Additional topics/discussions/ideas/observations (Only if the content does not fal into any previous categories/topics above) Notes & observations: In-depth Semi Structured Interview Guidelines Objective In-depth, semi-structured interviews intend to elaborate further on the report results and foreseen improvements based on those results. The interviews are verbal interchanges where the national coordinator attempts to elicit information from four in-company trainers and decision-making staff in VET school by asking questions. Even though the national coordinator wil prepare a list of predetermined questions, in-depth, semi-structured interviews usual y unfold in a conversational manner offering participants the chance to pursue issues they feel are important. In-depth interviews are conducted in order to gain a thorough insight into a particular issue, in our case future improvements. Interviews are conducted individual y and focused on each organisation separately. Interviewer The interview wil be done by the national coordinator. People wil talk more when they feel more relaxed and at ease, so the questions are not asked in any given order, rather they are asked in a way that develops the conversation. Interviewee In-depth semi-structured interviews are done with four in-company trainers and decision-making staff in VET school (four Pedagogical Managers/Directors, four Sector Heads/Managers, four Board Heads/Directors). The pre-condition to becoming an interviewee is that they have taken part in the SELFIE WBL pilot survey. Duration Typical y, a semi-structured interview lasts 30–60 minutes. This gives enough time to al ow for deeper conversations to take place but does not run too long which can lead to interviewee fatigue. Before the interview When recruiting interviewees, indicate that you would be happy to conduct the interview at a time and place which best suits them. Do not forget to remind the interviewee of the time, date and location of the interview (online). Before the interview commences the national coordinator should ask the interviewee if they consent to the interview being digital y recorded. Informed consent can be confirmed by the interviewer reading the consent form and the interviewee verbal y indicating that they agree. During the interview You need to listen careful y to what the interviewee is saying, for their response might not actual y answer the question. Alternatively, the interviewee may give you a vague response, to which, you might have to ask for clarification or further explanation. The most important thing to remember when conducting an interview is not to rush through the questioning. Also, do not interrupt participants when they are in the middle of a sentence or when they stop in order to col ect their thoughts. “Could you tel me” is always a good way of starting an interview or asking an interviewee to explain a particular point of view. Do not disclose the details or discuss the comments of another interviewee during an interview. This not only breaches past interviewees’ confidential y, but the present interviewee wil doubt your ability to maintain their confidence. This is not to say that you cannot talk in generalities (e.g. if an interviewee asks you “what have other people said” in relation to particular point, you could say “wel , a lot of interviewees have indicated that” etc.). Have your notepad and pen ready because sometimes interviewees can say the most insightful things when the digital recorder has been switched off. After the interview It is extremely important that you write the report immediately after the interview, whilst you can stil remember vividly al the aspects of the interview. The recorded audio of the interview should help you prepare an accurate report. Use your experience from each interview to improve the next interview. Topics/questions A semi-structured in-depth interview is usual y one in which the interviewer has a checklist of topic areas or questions. The topics that we would suggest are: Icebreakers Questions to the interviewees can include: − What were your expectations of participation in the survey? − Do you think your expectations were met? Discussion on relevant survey results Interviewees wil reflect and discuss their interpretation and in-depth understanding of the relevant survey results, for example going into different elements of SELFIE tool (e.g. Leadership, Infrastructure and Equipment, Teaching and Learning, etc.). Further fol ow-up questions can be asked about the reasons why they took part in the SELFIE survey if it is optimal or more out of necessity and if there are intentions to become either more or less involved in SELFIE tool in the future and/or use its results. Future improvements After interviewees discuss pilot results, they should consider implementing proposed solutions. This means that they (plan to) improve process/WBL and continue to look for ways to make it even better for their organisation. Questions to the interviewees can include: − What would be your potential reactions based on the survey results? − Is there an action plan to support the implementation of the proposed solutions? − How wil you prioritise your reactions to the results? Wil resources (e.g. financial, capacity) play a role in prioritisation process? Equipment/facilities In case of online interviews, a Zoom room can be set up by the Research Team (contact us13 at least one week prior to the event providing exact date and timeslot). 13 Research Team contacts: miha.zimšek@skupnost-vss.si and/or alicia.miklavcic@skupnost-vss.si. In-depth Semi-Structured Interviews Report Date: Country: School: Facilitator(s): Interviewee: Discussion Topics - Discussion 1: Icebreakers - Discussion 2: Discussion on relevant survey results - Discussion 3: Areas where further support is needed/useful Topic 1: Icebreakers Suggestions for discussion: Questions to the interviewees can include: - What were your expectations of participation in the survey? - Do you think your expectations were met? Common responses/general consensus: Areas of disagreement/lack of consensus: Notes & observations: Topic 2: Discussion on relevant survey results Suggestions for discussion: − What kind of technology are you using when you are working in the company? (state specific examples about the use of technology in company and in school?) − Did you start with digital learning because of COVID-19? − What problems did you face because of COVID-19? − Did you include blended learning? − Did you perform apprenticeships during the lockdown (remote mode/distance mode)? − Wil you use SELFIE WBL in the future? − What are the things you liked about SELFIE WBL? What could be improved? Interviewees wil reflect and discuss their interpretation and in-depth understanding of the relevant survey results, for example going into different elements of SELFIE tool (e.g. Leadership, Infrastructure and Equipment, Teaching and Learning, etc.). Further fol ow-up questions can be asked about the reasons why they took part in the SELFIE survey, if it is optimal or more out of necessity and if there are intentions to become either more or less involved in SELFIE tool in the future and/or use its results. Common responses/general consensus: Areas of disagreement/lack of consensus: Notes & observations: Topic 3: Future improvements Suggestions for discussion: Questions to the participants can include: − What would be your potential reactions based on the survey results? − Is there an action plan to support the implementation of the proposed solutions? − How wil you prioritise your reactions to the results? Wil resources (e.g. financial, capacity, etc.) play a role in the prioritisation process? Again, discussion should be encouraged comparing different situations, experiences, and visions. Common responses/general consensus: Areas of disagreement/lack of consensus: Notes & observations: Additional topics/discussions/ideas/observations (Fil in only if the content does not fal into any previous categories/topics above) Notes & observations: List of Challenges The fol owing tables are to be fil ed in by the corresponding participants in the pilot process from the beginning of their engagement until 15 November 2020. They wil help the research team to identify advantages and positive reflections on SELFIE WBL but foremost to identify chal enges and opportunities for improvement. School Coordinator/Leadership Country: School: Process Advantages Challenges School registration process Supporting materials and info Input of school data Customising survey Motivating participants - Students - Teachers - Leaders - Companies Generating links Survey content Survey technical issues Monitoring participation - Students - Teachers - Leaders - Companies SELFIE WBL Report - Usefulness - Features lacking Reaching objectives (40% of students and 40% of teachers) Certificates/Digital badges - Participants - School Findings (unexpected issues) Lessons learnt How COVID-19 affected /experience with blended learning, COVID-19 impact description of the profile of school, remote teaching and learning Other Add rows, as necessary. Source: Skupnost VSŠ, 2020. Annex 4. Analysis of open question “Suggestions for improvement” and examples of questions Thematic analyses, defined as a method for identifying, analysing and reporting patterns (topics) within data (Braun and Clarke, 2006) was used for analysing the open-ended question on “Suggestions for improvement” provided by students. Description of process: We read al answers from students to the open question: ”How can we improve SELFIE further? Share your ideas and suggestions with us.” We have familiarised ourselves with the data and prepared a list of key issues/topics and codes. Text answers of students were tabulated, and each answer was classified in topics (code). Then we counted the number of answers with the same code and prepared the Table. Categories/topics: S – about SELFIE TOOL (satisfaction, critics, missing topics) Q – opinion about questions (length, repeating, complicated) A – opinion about answers (number of answers, option others: ____ …) L – language (terminology, understandable, more languages) P – praises K – critics D – devices – problems with using tool on mobile phones T – timing of involvement I – design W – internet connection 0 – nothing to change, no ideas C – linked with COVID-19 DT – digital technology Table 3. Thematic analysis of open question responses by students Code Key words and answers summary Frequency Questions (similar questions, to general, formulate better, simplify, less, shorter, make more understandable, more in detail, more specific, clarifications needed, add Q explanation, too general, add questions about DT and remote teaching and learning, 204 digital books and educational resources, profession adapted questions, add optional questions, questions about teachers’ use of DT, negative site of DT, more open questions) SELFIE (too many questions, long, make shorter, concentrated text, make profession S specific, change the name, without personal questions, list more professions and 97 adapt to them, add voice – reading of questions) 0 No proposals, nothing left out, no need for changes, no idea 75 Answers (wider/specialised choice of options about professions and placement in company; whole sentences as answers/not 1-5 options; more answers, more A understandable answers, shorter answers, add decimal numbers, option ”other“ and possibility to write the answer, more detailed answer option, or a wider scale for 53 reviews, 10-level scale, German answers, difficult to distinguish between “ich stimme gar nicht zu" und "ich stimme nicht zu" P Praises (good, super, OK, fine, no shortcomings, liked SELFIE, everything clear, was 49 satisfied, everything included, could not be better, helpful explanations) L Language, vocabulary (too formal and specialised wording, bad translation, too 18 complicated, too long, make more understandable, add other languages: Russian) D Devices (answers were not completely readable, questions are not ful y visible, 17 sometimes too long text in answers for phones I Design (add grey/dark theme, colours, pictures, creativity, too similar colours) 14 T Timing (not long enough in the school to be able to answer some questions, only one day a week in the school, not yet in the company for practice 11 DT Digital technology (low use of DT in the school, bad equipment, provide the possibility to use PC rooms, school should be more digital) 5 W Wi-Fi (bad) 4 K Critics 4 Other: add the winning game 1 C Linked with COVID-19 0 Source: Own analysis. Examples of questions considered repetitive: In our school, I have access to the internet for learning In my company, I have access to the internet for learning In our school, there are computers or tablets for me to use In my company, I can learn operating the relevant (digital) equipment In our school, I use technology in different subjects In our school, we use technology for projects that combine different subjects Examples of questions considered too long and complex: In our school, I have access to a database of companies providing traineeships, apprenticeships and other opportunities In our school, teachers give us different activities to do using technology that suits our needs. In our company, in-company trainers use digital technologies to tailor the training to our individual needs. In our company, I gain experience in using digital technologies, which makes me more prepared for my future profession. In our school, we talk with teachers about the advantages and disadvantages of using technology for learning. In our school, I use technology to understand my strengths and weaknesses as a learner. In our company, I use digital technology to understand my strengths and weaknesses as a learner. In our school, I use technology to keep a record of what I have learned relevant to my field of study. Annex 5. School report “Overview of areas” Figure 13. Overview of areas snapshot from an anonymous SELFIE WBL school report. Source: Anonymous SELFIE WBL school report, 2020. Annex 6. Figures and tables with results of SELFIE WBL piloting quantitative data Figure 14 displays average values by respondent group for al variables. The mean on a five-point Likert scale (1-5) was the highest for in-company trainers (M=3.4) and the lowest for students (M=2.6). Figure 14. Mean score for all variables in main areas by respondent groups. Source: European Commission (2020). SELFIE database, special extraction for SELFIE WBL national coordinators. Table 4 displays the percentage of answers on overal satisfaction with SELFIE WBL on a 10-level scale by respondent group and means for satisfaction with SELFIE WBL by respondent group. The percentage of scores above the middle of the scale is the highest for the group of school leaders (86.3 %) and the lowest in the group of students (60.3 %). The highest satisfaction is in the group of school leaders (M=7.0) and the lowest, yet stil above the middle of the 10-level scale, is in the group of students (M=6.0). Mean of al respondents’ satisfaction is 6.0. Table 4. Overall satisfaction with SELFIE - percentage distribution by respondent group. In-company Total School leaders Teachers Students Score trainers N=3709 N=34 N=216 N=3430 N=29 1 0 % 1.4 % 6.3 % 0 % 5.9 % 2 0 % 2.3 % 2.4 % 3.4 % 2.4 % 3 5.9 % 4.2 % 5.5 % 6.9 % 5.4 % 4 2.9 % 5.6 % 6.5 % 3.4 % 6.4 % 5 5.9 % 18.5 % 19. 0 % 6.9 % 18.7 % 6 17.6 % 17.6 % 12.6 % 13.8 % 13.0 % 7 20.6 % 20.4 % 21.2 % 34.5 % 21.3 % 8 36.3 % 24.1 % 17.0 % 17.2 % 17.6 % 9 5.9 % 4.6 % 4.3 % 6.9 % 4.3 % 10 5.9 % 1.4 % 5.2 % 6.9 % 5.0 % Summary 1-5 14.7 % 32.0 % 39.7 % 20.6 % 38.8 % Summary 6-10 86.3 % 68.1 % 60.3 % 79.3 % 61.2 % Mean 7.0 6.3 6.0 6.7 6.0 Source: European Commission (2020). SELFIE database, special extraction for SELFIE WBL national coordinators. Students and in-company trainers were asked about their opinion of the questions included in the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise (Table 5). They rated the relevance of questions on a 10-level scale. Students provided 51.2 % of responses in the range of 6-10 (M=4.9), and in-company trainers in 69.0 % of responses in the range of 6-10 (M=5.9). Table 5. Relevance of questions by respondent group. Students N=3229 In-company trainers N=29 Score Frequency Percent Frequency Percent 1 316 9.8 % 1 3.4 % 2 131 4.0 % 3 10.3 % 3 261 8.1 % 2 6.9 % 4 300 9.3 % 1 3.4 % 5 569 17.6 % 2 6.9 % 6 385 11.9 % 3 10.3 % 7 538 16.7 % 11 37.9 % 8 391 12.1 % 5 17.2 % 9 142 4.4 % 1 3.4 % 10 196 6.1 % 0 0.0 % Summary 1-5 1577 48.8 % 9 31.0 % Summary 6-10 1652 51.2 % 20 69.0 % Mean 4.9 5.9 Source: European Commission (2020). SELFIE database, special extraction for SELFIE WBL national coordinators. Table 6 presents the percentage of answers about the likelihood for further recommending SELFIE WBL by respondent group on a 5-level scale. The highest percentage of positive responses (“Very likely” and “Extremely likely”) is in the group of school leaders (45.7 %). In the group of teachers 37.8 % of responses are negative responses (“Not at al likely” and “Not very likely”). The percentage for the answer “Prefer not to say” is the highest among in-company trainers (28.1 %). The average likelihood for further recommending the SELFIE WBL self-reflection exercise is in al groups above the middle of the 5-level scale. Table 6. Likelihood for further recommendation of SELFIE tool - percentage by respondent group. Recommending School leaders Teachers In-company Total SELFIE N=35 N=230 trainers N=32 N=297 Not at al likely 0.0 % 9.1 % 6.3 % 7.7 % Not very likely 11.4 % 28.7 % 21.9 % 25.9 % Somewhat likely 20.0 % 29.1 % 25.0 % 27.6 % Very likely 31.4 % 15.2 % 12.5 % 16.8 % Extremely likely 14.3 % 2.2 % 6.3 % 4.0 % Prefer not to say 22.9 % 15.7 % 28.1 % 17.8 % Mean 3.6 2.6 3.1 2.7 Source: European Commission (2020). SELFIE database, special extraction for SELFIE WBL national coordinators. Figure 15 displays the likelihood for further recommending SELFIE WBL. Means in al groups are above the middle of the 5-level scale. School leaders have the highest mean (3.6) and teachers the lowest (2.6). Figure 15. Mean likelihood for further recommending SELFIE. Source: European Commission (2020). SELFIE database, special extraction for SELFIE WBL national coordinators. Figure 16 displays the shares of factors which negatively affect digital technologies’ use in schools and companies. There was quite an agreement for the factor “Insufficient digital equipment”, which was one of the most negative factors. The negative factor rated by school leaders and teachers affecting the least the use of technologies was low digital competence of students, while in-company trainers rated “Students working space restrictions” and “Limited or no technical support” lowest. Figure 16: Negative factors for technology use in school and company - percentage by respondent group. Source: European Commission (2020). SELFIE database, special extraction for SELFIE WBL national coordinators. Figure 17 displays the shares of factors which negatively affect remote teaching, learning or training. There was quite an agreement between school leaders and teachers about the importance of “Limited students access to digital devices”. Teachers and in-company trainers found “Lack of time to develop material for remote teaching/training” as the most influential negative factor. However, al respondent groups agreed that “Difficulties in supporting families in helping students with remote learning” is the least relevant factor. Figure 17. Negative factors for technology use for remote teaching, learning, and training – percentage by respondent group. Source: European Commission (2020). SELFIE database, special extraction for SELFIE WBL national coordinators. Figure 18 displays the shares of factors which positively affect remote teaching, learning or training. There was quite an agreement between school leaders, teachers and in-company trainers about the importance of “Teachers and trainers’ collaboration on digital technology use”. School leaders and teachers found “Teachers participation in professional development programmes” as a very influential positive factor. School leaders and teachers agreed that the least influential factor of use of technology for remote teaching and learning was “Well-organised, regular communication with families”, while for in-company trainers it was the “Bring your own device” policy. Figure 18. P ositive factors for remote teaching, learning and training - percentage by respondent group. Source: European Commission (2020). SELFIE database, special extraction for SELFIE WBL national coordinators. Annex 7. Overview of SELFIE WBL results in Germany The outcomes of the pilot are not representative of the national education and training systems. They provide useful insights for schools and companies participating in the pilot and, overal , for schools and companies providing similar WBL programmes and belonging to the specific economic sectors covered by the pilot. Details of al questions can be found in the questionnaires on the SELFIE tool website. User participation Note: The six participation categories were answered by school coordinators during school registration. Categories for ‘disadvantaged homes’ and ‘different language’ are: fewer than 10 %, 10-25 %, 26-50 %, above 50 %, I don’t know. ‘Didn’t answer’ is also possible, as the questions were optional. SELFIE WBL – Main areas Note: positive responses = answers on 4 or 5 on a five-point scale SELFIE WBL - Additional areas Note: positive responses = answers on 4 or 5 on a five-point scale Satisfaction Note: Satisfaction with SELFIE WBL, on a scale from 1 to 10 Likelihood of recommending SELFIE Note: on a scale from 1 to 5 Annex 8. Country fiche Annex 9. List of tools similar to SELFIE and other tools used in WBL The goal was to map out existing self-reflection tools and other existing digital tools in the country and schools used in WBL contexts. This mapping and listing wil include official and available websites from governmental institutions responsible for overseeing the WBL in the country and with different stakeholders engaged in the pilot. Name of WBL tool Link Aim Advantages SELFIE is a free, online SELFIE al ows a school tool to help schools to monitor its progress https:/ ec.europa.eu/educ assess how they use over time and can help SELFIE WBL ation/schools-go- digital_en digital technologies for start a dialogue within innovative and effective the school on potential learning. areas for improvement. The portal presents an The wb-web provides overview of apps and information on trends, tools for VET in Germany discussions, research for adult and further results, publications, etc. education. The aim of from the continuing wb-web is to contribute education landscape. to the professional Knowledge modules development of teachers convey content from the in adult and further areas of work, advice, education. teaching/learning, interaction, methods, media and diagnosis. In addition, teaching http:/ www.digitale- material for the preparation, Wb-web portal berufsbildung.de/tools implementation and or https:/ wb-web.de/ fol ow-up of educational events is offered. Dossiers on important topics in adult and continuing education bundle the relevant content elements and thereby provide topic- related access. A community offers the opportunity to exchange ideas and network across fields of activity, regional and specialist boundaries. Search Engine for The Search Engine lists adequate search for optional digital tools qualitative digital tools which can help and to support teaching and support teaching and https:/ wbdig.guetesiegel learning in VET learning staff in study Tool-O-Search verbund.de/tool-o- processes. The Search search Engine presents a description of individual tools, comparison of tools, supports transparency of the tools and its quality. In addition, the Search Engine enables searching by different criteria and filters according to the user’s needs. Publication from The publication presents University of Dresden different digital tools providing Digital Toolbox from different aspects: of tools for different - for whom the tool is https:/ tu- learning/teaching/study suitable and relevant, dresden.de/karriere/weit erbildung/ressourcen/dat activities. - which activities the Digitale Toolbox eien/schreibzentrum/info tool supports/enables, - advantages and thek/Digitale_Toolbox_0 1_07_19.pdf?lang=de disadvantages, - list of similar tools. Etherpad, Padlet, Google Docs, Baiboard, Selfcontrol, etc. Report from The report clearly Bundesministerium für addresses digital tools Bildung und Forschung and best practices on https:/ www.bmbf.de/upl including digital specific professional eQualification 2020 oad_filestore/pub/eQuali tools/best practices areas as in Virtual and fication_Projektband_20 Augmented Reality, 20.pdf Inclusion, Transfer networks, Promotion of media skil s and media education BLok is the online tool BLok recognises as proof of training for advantages for different dual training target users, as for VET professions. Easy to use institutions those are: and clearly structured, - less organisational trainees, trainers and effort for the report vocational portfolio acceptance, schoolteachers can use - time-saving and the report booklet resource-saving https:/ www.online- together on the Internet. management of the report books thanks to BLok ausbildungsnachweis.de/ portal/index.php?id=hom legibility and paperless e work processes up to and including checking, - efficient control and approval of the report books even with a large number of trainees, - support of communication and cooperation with the trainers via integrated communication options. Reporting tool for WBL – Advantages of using: the electronic report - quick overview for THE DIGITAL REPORT https:/ www.azubiheft.de booklet offers the digital users, BOOK: TRAINEE BOOK / solution for companies, - ful y automated trainers and trainees processes ensure when monitoring and transparency and time reporting traineeship efficiency, processes. - easy control (available overview of the current status in the online report book), - time-saving (accessible at any time and enables convenient management on a PC, tablet and smartphone), - available templates and patterns (provided fields for entry of activities reduces incorrect entries and makes it easier for users to fil in and then check), - weekly/monthly reports by email or in PDF format for easy download. GETTING IN TOUCH WITH THE EU In person Al over the European Union there are hundreds of Europe Direct information centres. You can find the address of the centre nearest you at: https:/ europa.eu/european-union/contact_en On the phone or by email Europe Direct is a service that answers your questions about the European Union. You can contact this service: - by freephone: 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (certain operators may charge for these cal s), - at the fol owing standard number: +32 22999696, or - by electronic mail via: https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en FINDING INFORMATION ABOUT THE EU Online Information about the European Union in al the official languages of the EU is available on the Europa website at: https://europa.eu/european-union/index_en EU publications You can download or order free and priced EU publications from EU Bookshop at: https:/ publications.europa.eu/en/publications. Multiple copies of free publications may be obtained by contacting Europe Direct or your local information centre (see https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en). KJ-NA -30824 -EN - N Kataložni zapis o publikaciji (CIP) pripravili v Narodni in univerzitetni knjižnici v Ljubljani COBISS.SI-ID 89676547 ISBN 978-92-76-41482-7 (PDF) doi:10.2760/406787 IS BN 978-92-76-41482-7