Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 19th Aug 2026, 21:28:03 EET
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
02 SES 02 A: AI and Digitaisation I
Paper Session
| ||
    | ||
02. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Paper Reflecting Innovation-driven Instructional Competences of Vocational Teachers for Digital, Competence-oriented Teaching and Learning Arrangements: Comparative Evidence from Germany and China Technical University of Dortmund, Germany Presenting Author:Digital technologies are increasingly positioned as catalysts for competence-oriented vocational teaching and learning arrangement, yet empirical work repeatedly shows that “technology integration” is less a matter of tool availability than of teachers’ situated instructional competence to design, orchestrate, and critically evaluate learning arrangements under curricular, occupational, and organisational constraints (cf. Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Redecker, 2017). In vocational education and training (VET), this challenge is intensified by the need to connect school-based learning with occupational practices and workplaces, often through boundary-crossing learning tasks, authentic assessment, and hybrid learning arenas (cf. Wesselink, de Jong & Biemans, 2010; Lahn & Berntsen, 2023). At the same time, competence-based curriculum reforms commonly generate implementation tensions around authenticity, self-direction, and the teacher role (de Bruijn & Leeman, 2011), making “innovation-driven instructional competence” a theoretically and empirically relevant lens for analysing how vocational teachers enact digital, competence-oriented teaching and learning arrangements. This study conceptualises vocational teachers’ innovation-driven instructional competences as a central hinge between knowing about digital learning and acting with digital tools in competence-oriented classroom practice. In logistics VET, digital tools such as ERP platforms, process simulations, and blended learning resources are increasingly referenced in curricula and programmes (Author, 2026). Yet their pedagogical value is neither self-evident nor stable: digital tools can amplify competence-oriented teaching and learning when they are embedded in coherent task progressions, scaffolded inquiry, and evidence-based feedback routines; they can also reduce competence orientation when tool use becomes predominantly demonstrative, when simulation activity lacks structured reflection, or when data traces remain pedagogically “silent” due to missing criteria, feedback cycles, and judgement routines (ibid.). Building on an empirical comparative study of competence-oriented curriculum implementation in logistics-related VET contexts in Germany and China, this study focuses on how digital learning tools are used (or not used) to realise competence-oriented pedagogical principles in teaching and learning practice and how teachers reflect on these enactments. Three interrelated research questions guide the study: (1) How are competence-oriented digital teaching expectations and competence demands for vocational teachers articulated in the Chinese and German logistics VET programme documents? (2) How do teachers enact digitally supported competence-oriented arrangements in practice, and which recurring variation patterns can be identified? (3) How do teachers critically reflect and reframe their practices when confronted with tensions between competence aims and the constraints of digital tools, especially where feedback remains informal and where digital artefacts are underused as evidence for learning and competence development? The theoretical framework combines three strands that are often treated separately in VET research. First, competence-oriented VET is conceptualised as a curricular and didactic endeavour requiring coherent alignment of intended, interpreted, and implemented curriculum, with particular sensitivity to authenticity, self-direction, and assessment (cf. Goncharova et al., 2024; Sturing et al., 2011; de Bruijn & Leeman, 2011; Mulder et al., 2007). Second, teachers’ professional competence is framed as a multi-component construct (knowledge, beliefs, motivational orientations, self-regulation) that manifests in instructional quality and adaptive decision-making (Baumert & Kunter, 2006, 2013). Third, digitalisation is addressed through teacher digital competence frameworks that foreground pedagogical and ethical-professional aspects (e.g., designing digital resources, orchestrating learning, assessment, learner support) rather than mere operational skills (Redecker, 2017; Cattaneo, Antonietti & Rauseo, 2022; Lahn & Berntsen, 2023). “Innovation-driven instructional competence” is positioned at the intersection of these strands and additionally informed by research on teacher innovativeness as a driver of change in (digital) teaching practices (Vidergor, 2023). The intended theoretical contribution of this study is to generate an empirically grounded foundation for subsequent conceptual reframing, refining the competence dimensions most critical to innovation-oriented, digital, competence-based VET teaching and learning arrangements across contexts. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The study follows a comparative multiple-case design across selected logistics VET programmes in Germany and China, using a mixed-methods triangulation strategy to capture intended, interpreted, and implemented curriculum and to link observed classroom practice with teachers’ reflective sense-making. Data sources include (a) curriculum and instructional material analysis with a focus on competence-oriented intentions and digitalisation-related specifications, (b) non-participant classroom observations of selected logistics lessons with structured observation protocols addressing competence-oriented didactic principles and technology-mediated learning activities, and (c) teacher interviews, including stimulated-recall elements to elicit pedagogical reasoning and reflection on observed episodes. Sampling is purposeful and contrastive (e.g., tool-rich vs. tool-limited settings; explicit vs. informal feedback/assessment cultures). Analysis combines deductive-inductive qualitative content analysis with cross-case comparison. A theory-informed coding scheme operationalises innovation-driven instructional competences through observable indicators in: (1) competence-oriented alignment (outcomes-tasks-assessment), (2) orchestration/scaffolding in hybrid and simulation environments, (3) digitally enabled formative assessment and process diagnostics, and (4) reflective handling of constraints and ethical-professional issues (e.g., data use, transparency). Comparative synthesis will produce a typology of competence profiles and recurrent tension patterns across the two contexts, serving as an empirical basis for subsequent conceptual refinement. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Empirically, the study is expected to yield a fine-grained map of how digital tools are pedagogically embedded in competence-oriented logistics teaching in both contexts, distinguishing between superficial digital substitution and competence-relevant integration (e.g., simulation-based task solving, data-driven decision exercises, digitally supported reflection and feedback loops) and showing where competence-oriented principles (authenticity, self-direction, reflective learning, criterion-based assessment) are strengthened or diluted by digital mediation . The comparative lens is expected to reveal context-specific “implementation signatures” of innovation-driven instructional competence, including recurring tensions between curricular requirements, examination logics, available infrastructures, and teachers’ discretionary space for pedagogical innovation. Theoretically, the results are expected to substantiate a set of empirically grounded competence dimensions for innovation-driven teaching in digital, competence-oriented VET arrangements, likely spanning (a) design competence for authentic, competence-targeted digital tasks; (b) orchestration competence for interactive, adaptive facilitation with digital tools; (c) assessment and feedback competence for competence-oriented evaluation supported by digital evidence; (d) reflective competence to interpret learning traces and revise instruction; and (e) boundary-connecting competence to link school learning to occupational practice. These outcomes are intended to function as an evidence base for a subsequent theoretical reframing effort. References Author. (2026, in print). Digital gestützte Lernräume in der chinesischen Logistikausbildung: Einblicke in die Curricula und Unterrichtsrealisierung. Lehren & Lernen. Baumert, J., & Kunter, M. (2006). Stichwort: Professionelle Kompetenz von Lehrkräften. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 9, 469–520. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-006-0165-2 Baumert, J., & Kunter, M. (2013). The COACTIV model of teachers’ professional competence. In M. Kunter et al. (Eds.), Cognitive activation in the mathematics classroom and professional competence of teachers (pp. 25–48). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5149-5_2 Cattaneo, A. A. P., Antonietti, C., & Rauseo, M. (2022). How digitalised are vocational teachers? Computers & Education, 176, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104358 de Bruijn, E., & Leeman, Y. (2011). Authentic and self-directed learning in vocational education: Challenges to vocational educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(4), 694–702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.11.007 Goncharova, A., Chen, P.J., Frommberger, D., Pilz, M., Li, J.M. (2024). Implementation of Competence-Based Approach in Chinese and Russian Commercial Vocational Education and Training. In: Gessler, M., et al. (Eds.), Expanding Horizons. Internationale Berufsbildungsforschung (pp. 73–92). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-43742-8_4 Lahn, L. C., & Berntsen, S. K. (2023). Frameworking vocational teachers’ digital competences: An integrative literature review and synthesis. Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education, 7(2), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.7577/njcie.5322 Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108, 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x Mulder, M., Weigel, T., & Collins, K. (2007). The concept of competence in the development of vocational education and training in selected EU member states: A critical analysis. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 59(1), 65–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820601145630 Redecker, C. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu. (Y. Punie, ed.). Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/159770. Sturing, L., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., & de Bruijn, E. (2011). The nature of study programmes in vocational education. Vocations and Learning, 4, 191–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-011-9059-4 Vidergor, H. E. (2023). The effect of teachers’ self-innovativeness on accountability, distance learning self-efficacy, and teaching practices. Computers & Education, 199, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104777 Wesselink, R., de Jong, C., & Biemans, H. J. A. (2010). Aspects of competence-based education as footholds to improve connectivity between learning in school and in the workplace. Vocations and Learning, 3, 19–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-009-9027-4 02. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Paper Where Does Professional Learning Really Take Place? Formal, Non-formal and Informal Learning in Times of Digital Transformation Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Germany Presenting Author:Digitalisation constitutes a central driver of contemporary processes of transformation and fundamentally reshapes how knowledge is produced, transmitted and acquired. Professional learning is likewise increasingly taking place under digital conditions, which further enhances the relevance of informal forms of learning. In educational research, it is frequently emphasised that formal, non-formal and informal learning are closely intertwined. However, how this entanglement is concretely configured and how it shapes professional practice has so far been insufficiently explored both theoretically and empirically. Against this background, the paper addresses the question of how different forms of learning are interrelated in professional learning and, additionally, what effects these different forms of learning have. When professionals decide to engage in continuing professional development, the different forms of learning should aim at the deliberate further development of professional knowledge, skills and competences, or professional habitus. Whether these objectives are achieved can be assessed by examining the output and outcomes of a learning experience (cf. Echarti, Reichart & Gerhards, 2021). Whereas output refers to the immediate results of an educational measure, outcomes relate to the more sustainable effects on participants’ professional or personal practice. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Empirically, the paper draws on data from a standardized survey conducted in 2025 among professionals in social work regarding their continuing education and train-ing behaviour with respect to social media as a subject of learning and professional practice. The survey was conducted over a period of six weeks using the tools Unipark and SoSci Survey. Of the N = 1.436 participants, N = 109 had to be exclud-ed during data cleaning due to conspicuous or implausible values, resulting in a cleaned sample of N = 1.327. The majority of respondents were female (78%), fol-lowed by male participants (22%), and a small number of individuals who identified as diverse (less than 1%). Respondents’ ages ranged from 22 to 66 years, with a mean age of M = 41.24 years (SD = 10.63). Most participants were employed by public providers (56%), while 44% worked for non-profit or independent providers. The average workload fell within the 61–70% range, whereas the most common employment level was 41–50%. Based on correlation and regression analyses, the study examines how social work professionals acquire knowledge and competences, how they combine different forms of learning and how these learning processes are related to professional practice. To analyse a metrically scaled dependent variable linear regression was applied. Linear regression makes it possible to quantify the influence of individual independent variables on the dependent variable. A regression equation is esti-mated to predict the dependent variable as accurately as possible on the basis of the predictors. Because one dependent variable was dichotomous, logistic regres-sion analyses were conducted. This method has proven particularly useful for the analysis of categorical outcome variables. The results of the analyses are reported as odds ratios (OR). The aim is to make visible and analytically capture the dynamics between formal qualification programmes, non-formal continuing education formats and informal learning processes, and to examine the effects of these different forms of learning in terms of both output and outcome. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings In doing so, the paper contributes to current debates on the conditions and poten-tials of knowledge production and acquisition in the context of digital transformation. At the same time, it speaks directly to the guiding questions of ECER 2026 by demonstrating how professional learning processes are changing within a polycri-sis-shaped and digitally mediated knowledge ecology. In the professional development of practitioners, informal learning predominates as the central form of individual professionalization: practitioners primarily acquire competencies through personal experiences of use and collegial exchange. (Non-)formal continuing education formats are used significantly less frequently. With regard to continuing professional education and the perception of social me-dia, complex interrelations emerge that do not allow for clear-cut effects. Informal as well as (non-)formal learning opportunities appear to fulfill different functions with respect to professional practice. While (non-)formal continuing education does not seem to be significantly associated with attitudes or perceived competence, it corre-lates with the decision of whether social media are used in work with young people. Informal learning, by contrast, correlates positively with the development of attitudes and perceived competence, but has no direct influence on the actual use of social media in professional practice with children and adolescents. This distinction points to the need to examine the effects of continuing education longitudinally in order to assess both its output and its outcome. A theoretical framework that takes these differences into account also seems meaningful for scholarly discourse in light of the present findings. Moreover, against the background of this study’s results, it is problematic that infor-mal learning is often treated in a generalized manner in academic discourse. The findings suggest the need for a differentiated typology of informal learning in order to do justice to its actual impact on individual professionalization processes. References Colley, H., Hodkinson, P., & Malcolm, J. (2002). Non-formal learning: Mapping the conceptual terrain. A consultation report. University of Leeds, Lifelong Learning In-stitute. http://www.infed.org/archives/e-texts/colley_informal_learning.htm Czerkawski, B. (2016). Blending formal and informal learning networks for online learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(3), 138–156. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i3.2344 Johnson, M., & Majewska, D. (2022). Formal, non-formal, and informal learning: What are they, and how can we research them? Cambridge University Press. Karhapää, A., Hämäläinen, R., & Pöysä-Tarhonen, J. (2025). Digital work practices that promote informal workplace learning: Digital ethnography in a knowledge work context. Studies in Continuing Education, 47(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2023.2274596 Rogers, A. (2014). The base of the iceberg: Informal learning and its impact on for-mal and non-formal learning. Barbara Budrich. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:14844 02. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Paper Digital Transformation as a Collective Task: Collaborative Organisational Development between School Maintaining Bodies and Vocational Schools University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany Presenting Author:In the course of digital transformation, the role of school maintaining bodies is changing from administrative managers to strategic partners in the organisational development of vocational schools. Digitalisation is not seen as an administrative task, but rather as part of a comprehensive school development process that requires close inter-organisational collaboration between the maintaining bodies and the vocational schools. The specific profile and complexity of vocational schools requires a high degree of agility in the school maintaining bodies’ digitalisation management. This is because these changed tasks mean that school maintaining bodies and schools must establish effective multi-professional cooperation structures in order to combine digital education technologies and Open Educational Resources (OER) with educational concepts in a sustainable way (Hermstein 2021). In order for the actors to successfully initiate and implement the process, strategic planning for organisational development at vocational schools is required (Müller-Böling & Krasny 1998). This presentation addresses this issue and examines the question: What promotes or hinders the role of school maintaining bodies as strategic partners in school organisational development at vocational schools? The promoter model will be used as the theoretical basis. This model assumes that innovation processes must be actively initiated, driven forward and terminated by various stakeholders (Hölzle & Gemünden 2011). The work involved in the innovation process is divided up among the various players, each of whom makes specific contributions based on their personality, motivation, and the nature of their role as promoters. In their various roles, school maintaining bodies employees work as power promoters, specialist promoters, process promoters and relationship promoters (Niermann & Palmas 2017; Witte 1973). By working together, all these key players can drive innovation forward. While power promoters can provide resources and protect the strategic development of digitalisation management to their high hierarchical potential, specialist promoters provide the necessary expertise for innovation. Process promoters are familiar with processes and structures within organisations and support the innovation process through coordination, planning, and control. Relationship promoters act as a link across the organisation and mediate between individuals and organisations (Gemünden & Walter 1999; Hauschildt & Gemünden 1999; Hölzle & Gemünden 2011; Hauschildt & Kirchmann 1999; Witte 1999; Witte 1973). Since they work on different aspects of the innovation and development process, it is particularly important for strategic planning that the individual aspects are meaningfully linked in a controlled (change)process (Müller-Böling 1998). Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The data was collected as part of a project in germany. The project aims to reflect on digitalisation processes at vocational schools and to (further) develop strategies for digitalisation management among school maintaining bodies in rural districts. The focus is on providing needs-based support to school maintaining bodies in rural districts during an extensive organisational development process in the context of digitalisation management for vocational schools. The data is based on a quantitative online survey in five federal states (valid cases: n=135) and interviews with employees of the school maintaining bodies (n=11; pers.:29) and stakeholders of vocational schools in three federal states (n=6; pers.:9). Further interviews are currently being conducted with school administrators and teachers with roles in the field of digitalisation, which will also be included in the analysis. The mixed-methods design provides initial insights into the organisational structures and processes in the rural district governance-level in the field of education, the (legal, financial, and institutional) framework conditions for digitalisation management for vocational schools, and initial findings on the digital education infrastructure in the rural districts. The evaluation is carried out using quantitative methods and a qualitative content analysis of the interviews, based on the promoter model. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The quantitative survey results show that the work of school maintaining bodies as actors at the interface of a multi-level educational system is challenging, as they operate between the requirements of the federal states and the needs of the vocational schools. In addition, there are technical and financial bottlenecks as well as differing objectives between school maintaining bodies and vocational schools, which make collaboration difficult. The starting point for building a future-oriented infrastructure is the development of a cross-stakeholder vision that synergistically links technical action and pedagogical school development. This is where the results of the qualitative content analysis come into play. The administrative heads of the school maintaining bodies act as power promoters, although there are already differences in their knowledge of the complexity of digitally-driven school development processes. IT staff serve as specialist and relationship promoters. As specialists, they have high knowledge of digital infrastructure, the digital technical requirements of certain systems, and implementation and solution strategies, among other things. As relationship promoters, they must strike a balance between the short-term needs of teachers in schools and the tasks to be fulfilled when visiting schools. They also coordinate with external providers to ensure infrastructure functionality, requiring constant communication across all levels. It is apparent that school maintaining bodies in the districts combine their promoter roles in different ways and interact in daily practice in multi-professional actor constellations. Some districts focus on targeted cooperation within the school maintaining bodies organisation in order to provide targeted support to vocational schools as strategic partners. This is achieved by pooling and managing the knowledge and skills of the individual actors in their role as promoters. Others, however, have difficulty penetrating the hierarchical levels of their own organisation. As a result, valuable knowledge that would be important for supporting vocational schools is lost. References Gemünden, H.G. & A. Walter, 1999: Beziehungspromotoren – Schlüsselpersonen für zwischenbetriebliche Innovationsprozesse. pp. 111-132 in: J. Hauschildt & H.G. Gemünden (eds.), Promotoren. Champions der Innovation. 2.nd ed.. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler. Hauschildt, J. & H.G. Gemünden (eds.), 1999: Promotoren. Champions der Innovation. 2.nd ed.. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler. Hermstein, B., 2021: Zur Unterstützung von Einzelschule und Schulentwicklung durch kommunale Schulträger. pp. 215-236 in: T. Webs & V. Manitius (eds.), Unterstützungssysteme für Schulen. Konzepte, Befunde und Perspektiven. Bielefeld: wbv. Hölzle, K. & H.G. Gemünden, 2011: Schlüsselpersonen der Innovation. Champions und Promotoren. pp. 495-512 in: S. Albers & O. Gassmann (eds.), Handbuch Technologie- und Innovationsmanagement. 2.nd ed.. Wiesbaden: Springer. Hauschildt, J. & E. Kirchmann, 1999: Zur Existenz und Effizienz von Prozeßpromotoren. pp. 89-110 in: J. Hauschildt & H.G. Gemünden (eds.), Promotoren. Champions der Innovation. 2.nd ed.. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler. Kussau, J. & T. Brüsemeister, 2007: Educational Governance: Zur Analyse der Handlungskoordination im Mehrebenensystem der Schule. pp. 15-54 in: H. Altrichter, T. Brüsemeister & J. Wissinger (eds.), Educational Governance. Handlungskoordination und Steuerung im Bildungssystem. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Maag Merki, K. & H. Altrichter, 2015: Educational Governance. Die Deutsche Schule 107 (4): 396-410. Müller-Böling, D. & E. Krasny, 1998: Strategische Planung an deutschen Hochschulen – theoretisches Konstrukt und erste Ansätze einer Methodologie. pp. 13-48 in: D. Müller-Böling, L. Zechlin, K. Neuvians, S. Nickel & P. Wismann (eds.), Strategieentwicklung an Hochschulen. Konzepte – Prozesse – Akteure. Gütersloh: Verlag Bertelsmann Stiftung. Niermann, P. F.-J. & F. Palmas, 2017: Das kreative Management. pp. 333-354 in: P. F.-J. Niermann & A.M. Schmutte (eds.), Managemententscheidungen. Methoden, Handlungsempfehlungen, Best Practices. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler. Witte, E., 1999: Das Promotoren-Modell. pp. 9-42 in: J. Hauschildt & H.G. Gemünden (eds.), Promotoren. Champions der Innovation. 2.nd ed.. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler. Witte, E., 1973: Organisation für Innovationsentscheidungen – Das Promotoren-Modell. 02. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Paper Perceived Usefulness of a Multimedia Learning Environment for the Applied Informatics Sector Institute Technology and Education, University of Bremen, Germany Presenting Author:Occupations in the field of information and communication technology (ICT) are among the key growth and innovation areas in the labour market (Bundesargentur für Arbeit, 2025). In 2024, around 1.52 million ICT specialists were employed in Germany. Around 27% of them came from Europe, particularly Italy and Spain (ibid.). Although around 93.5% of people with ICT qualifications were employed at EU level in 2024, Spain had the highest proportion of unemployed people with ICT qualifications at 9.9%. As a non-EU country, Serbia saw the most significant increase in the proportion of employed persons with ICT training in 2024, with an employment rate of 90.0% (Eurostat, n.d.).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The design and development work for the multimedia learning environment was carried out by combining existing models: In a first step, professional spheres of activity were defined across countries based on Howe & Knutzen (2021a). In a second step, learning and work tasks were designed through close collaboration between vocational schools, universities and industry (Howe & Knutzen, 2021b). The design and development work for the multimedia learning environment is based on the ten learning psychology and didactic decision-making areas according to Niegemann (2020): (1) format decision, (2) content structuring, (3) learning tasks and narration, (4) technical conditions and developments, (5) multimedia design, (6) motivational design, (7) interaction design, (8) time structuring, (9) graphic design & layout and (10) implementation. A design-based research (DBR) approach was chosen for the research design. This model is iterative and cyclical in nature. Reinmann states that there is no absolute beginning and no absolute end. Theoretically, the DBR process can be entered at any point and repeated as often as desired (Reinmann, 2020). A characteristic feature of the DBR approach is the close link between research and practice, as the research addresses a real, practice-relevant educational problem for which no mature solution exists yet. In this context, new approaches or products are developed, such as educational and teaching-learning concepts, didactic methods or media technology infrastructures (Reinmann, 2017). The methodological approach of this study follows a quantitative research approach. In order to obtain an overall view of the subjective assessments of the user-friendliness of the multimedia learning environment, our survey instrument is based on the System Usability Scale (SUS), based on Brooke (1996). Our questionnaire consists of 10 items with Likert-scaled response options. The 4-point scale ranges from ‘strongly disagree’ to ‘strongly agree’. Testing of the pilot began in August 2025 and will end in May 2026. At present, the sample in the first cycle consists of n = 70. In order to get an overall impression of the user-friendliness of the multimedia learning environment, we will first determine descriptive-statistical parameters (Döring, 2023). The sample consists of students of applied informatic science and trainees at vocational schools for IT in the partner countries Italy, Spain, Serbia and Germany. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings With regard to the research questions, the following interim results can be derived. Overall, users rate the multimedia learning environment positively. Taking into account the ten learning psychology and didactic decision-making areas, it should first be emphasised that users rated the content structure (area 2) positively. The learning content of the multimedia learning environment is perceived by users as being clearly structured. In addition, the current structure helps to better understand the learning paths. The integrated learning and work tasks are also easy to understand and well explained from the user's point of view in terms of their instructions and task descriptions (area 3: Learning tasks and narration). Across countries, the learning and work tasks seem to offer easy access to learning for users. In addition, the results show that the first pilot has a simple overall usage (area 6: Motivational design). In the iterative process, users perceive a need for adaptation, particularly in the areas of multimedia design (area 5) and interaction design (area 7), which are relevant to learning psychology and didactics. The next step should be to make adjustments to the multimedia elements used to date to support learning and work tasks (e.g. text, symbols, graphics). Interaction design should also be adapted for intuitive and smoother use. For the second cycle, qualitative data is used to ensure a more precise adaptation of the multimedia learning environment. The use of multimedia learning environments represents a potentially effective approach to promoting sustainable learning processes. The specific learning outcomes will be determined following the piloting of the prototype as part of further follow-up research. References Bitkom (2026). Der Arbeitsmarkt für IT Fachkräfte: Bitkom Studie 2025 (Studienbericht). https://www.bitkom.org/sites/main/files/2026-01/bitkom-studienbericht-it-fachkraefte-2025.pdf Brooke, J. (1996). SUS: A "quick and dirty" usability scale. In P. W. Jordan, B. Thomas, B. A. Weerdmeester & I. L. McClelland (Eds.), Usability Evaluation in Industry (pp. 189–194). Taylor & Francis. Bundesagentur für Arbeit. (2025). Der Arbeitsmarkt für IKT-Berufe im Kontext der Transformation (Berichte: Arbeitsmarkt kompakt). Statistik der Bundesagentur für Arbeit. https://www.arbeitsagentur.de/datei/der-arbeitsmarkt-fuer-ikt-berufe-im-kontext-der-transformation_ba053543.pdf Denninger, A., & Käpplinger, B. (2021). COVID-19 und Weiterbildung – Überblick zu Forschungsbefunden und Desideraten. Zeitschrift für Weiterbildungsforschung, 44(2), 161–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40955-021-00190-7 Döring, N. (2023). Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation in den Sozial und Humanwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-64762-2 Eurostat. (o. J.). ICT education – a statistical overview. Europäische Kommission. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=ICT_education_-_a_statistical_overview European commission. (o. J.). Cooperation partnerships. Erasmus+ Program Guide. https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/programme-guide/part-b/key-action-2/cooperation-partnerships Howe, F., & Knutzen, S. (2021a). Berufliche Handlungsfelder beschreiben. tredition. https://doi.org/10.26092/elib/830 Howe, F., & Knutzen, S. (2021b). Lern- und Arbeitsaufgaben entwickeln. tredition. https://doi.org/10.26092/elib/899 Jansen, A., Flake, R., & Schirner, S. (2020). Die Fachkräftesituation in IT-Berufen und Potentiale der Zuwanderung. https://www.kofa.de/media/Publikationen/Studien/IT-Fachkraefte_2020_04.pdf Kultusministerkonferenz (KMK). (2021). Lehren und Lernen in der digitalen Welt: Ergänzung zur Strategie der Kultusministerkonferenz „Bildung in der digitalen Welt“ (Beschluss der Kultusministerkonferenz vom 09.12.2021). Kultusministerkonferenz. https://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/veroeffentlichungen_beschluesse/2021/2021_12_09-Lehren-und-Lernen-Digi.pdf Niegemann, H. M. (2020). Instructional Design. In H. M. Niegemann & A. Weinberger (Hrsg.), Handbuch Bildungstechnologie: Konzeption und Einsatz digitaler Lernumgebungen (S. 95–151). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-54368-9 Reinmann, G. (2017). Design-based Research. In D. Schemme & H. Novak (Hrsg.), Gestaltungs-orientierte Forschung – Basis für soziale Innovationen. Erprobte Ansätze im Zusammenwirken von Wissenschaft und Praxis, 49–61. Bertelsmann. Reinmann, G. (2020). Ein holistischer Design-Based Research-Modellentwurf für die Hochschuldidaktik. Educational Design Research, 4 (2), Article 30. URL: https://journals.sub.uni-hamburg.de/EDeR/article/view/1554/1370 Siemer, C. (2023). Lernerfolgsrelevante Gestaltungsmerkmale einer virtuellen 360°-Lernumgebung. Ein Fallbeispiel aus der Logistikbranche. MedienPädagogik: Zeitschrift für Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung, 254 – 278. https://doi.org/10.21240/mpaed/00/2023.08.23.X | ||