ECER weblog and discussion space

The round table session on "Regional Development" was designed as a follow-up to the ECER'04 session on the potentials of 'action research' in linking VET-related research to new innovation agendas. It seemed appropriate to continue the methodological discussion with a closer look at the innovation landscapes that are available in different countries and the contexts work in which VET-related research is involved.

My task in the session was to prepare an introductory overview on different approaches tht were identified in European research & development programmes. I also tried to develop methodological clusters for the contextualisation of the national cases that were invited to the round table.

To me the contextual starting point was an emerging regional networking landscape for promoting competences, networking and sub-regional innovations in the area of Central Finland. The organisation for which I was working at that time (Jyväskylä Polytechnic - Jypoly) was exploring its possibilities to contribute as a catalyst and as a prtner for the emerging sub-regional projects. From this perspective there was an interest to get a European group picture of similar approaches and to learn from the experiences of similar approaches.

Part of that effort (and part of my presentation) was to draw conclusions from the bilateral exchanges between Jypoly and Institut Technik & BIldung. Based on these exchanges we had prepared a picture of a family of 'monitoring tools' that were linked to different innovation programmes, monitoring roles and interests of knowledge. Thus, the ITB-toolbox consisted of tools for macro-systemic programme evaluation (Landesprogramm Arbeit und Technik), meso-systemic programme monitoring (BLK-Programm Neue Lernkonzepte ...), exo-systemic self-monitoring of private-public partnerships (the European project COVOSECO) and micro-systemic monitoring of the development of knowledge management concepts in small end medium enterprises (the European project KM-plus).

Another part of the effort (and of my presentation) was to explore the emergence of newer project concepts that were not based on a 'monitoring' task or on focal 'monitoring tools'. In such project designs the role of researchers was to provide methodological support alongside the shaping of the developmental initiatives and as a response to the project dynamics. With the help of the conceptual map that was constructed of the 'monitoring tools' I presented a similar map on 'positioning tools' that help the 'learning communities' to position themselves and their projects into a broader innovation landscape.

In this respect I presented a preliminary analysis of the other national cases (based on written information on the web). I related the Irish "SPEAK" support environment for presenting strategic project environment to positioning at the macro-level discourses on innovation policies. Likewise, I related the Dutch "CLOP" project environment and the CLOP-scan instrument to the meso-systemic level of regional partnerships and capacity-building for such partnership cooperation. Then, I drew attention to the debates on 'personal learning landscapes' and 'virtual learning environments' as exo-systemic models for constructing 'regional learning landscapes' (based on virtual support servces and facilities). Finally, I drew attention to the current debates on 'developmental portfolios' as means to record and present non-formal learning and on the need to create awareness on the micro-systemic level of 'project-specific learning' in order to make the innovation concepts transferable.

With these preliminar mappings I tried to contribute to a dialogue across the two sets of 'toolboxes' or project clusters. At the same time I tried to make transparent the complementary relations within the toolboxes or project clusters.