Conference Agenda

Vocational education and training (VET) is being increasingly challenged to adapt better and faster to changes on the labor market, to provide the requested skills for employment, and to empower learners to respond to these changes. Modularisation in vocational education and training is generally perceived as part of the response to this need for flexibility, both in relation to the labor market and in relation to the students themselves.

Modularisation in VET has been the subject of debate at the European level for the past 40 years (e.g., Howieson, 1992; Sellin, 1994; De Bruijn and Howieson, 1995), and in recent years it has been seen as part of a broader strategy to modernize VET, particularly due to the need for flexible education systems that are able to respond to the challenges of contemporary society (CEDEFOP, 2015). Modularisation refers to the creation of educational programs through educational modules.

The CEDEFOP study (2015) analyzed conceptual approaches to modularisation in 15 EU member states and also described their development of modularisation. The study by Pilz et al (2018) focuses on an investigation of modularisation as a tool for achieving flexibility based on analyses of 7 European countries. Neither the CEDEFOP study (2015) nor the Pilz et al. (2018) paper mentions the development of modularisation in the Czech Republic. The aim of this paper is to present the development of modularisation in the Czech Republic.

The first modular educational programs were created at several secondary technical schools and secondary vocational schools in the early 1990s as part of the ESF Phare-VET program (Kofroňová et al. 1990). The strategic document National Programme for the Development of Education in the Czech Republic – White Paper (2001, p. 72) adopted by the Czech government already called for "Modular study programs using a credit system that provides for changes during the course of studies allow people to continue studying when necessary throughout their whole life, in the same institution or a different one, at home or abroad. Nevertheless, this must always be under the condition that the requirements of the study program (module) are met."

The NRP EQAVET CZ (2025) reports that the national project MOV (Modernisation of VET), executed from 2017 to 2020, sought to enhance the quality of VET by modernizing initial vocational education and training (IVET) through the development of educational modules across 105 participating schools. Two years after completion of the MOV project, a subsequent survey by the National Pedagogical Institute of the Czech Republic (NPI) revealed that only 23 out of these schools, representing approximately 2% of VET institutions in the country, continued to implement modularization in their curricula, with only four doing so systematically.

The Strategy for Education Policy of the Czech Republic up to 2030+ (Strategy 2030+) identifies modularisation as a key instrument for improving flexibility, quality, and permeability in Czech education, particularly within vocational education and training, that is significant structural shift in Czech education. While initially implemented through pilot activities within the national project MOV, it gradually should being integrated into national policy through curriculum reform and systemic innovation, however, as a voluntary component.

However, its success depends on the creation of conditions for modularisation in schools. Therefore, this paper addresses two research questions: RQ1: How has modularisation developed in IVET in the Czech Republic at specific schools? RQ2: What conditions have facilitated modularisation at the VET schools studied?

There has been renewed scholarly interest in how nationalism and national identity shape educational systems, practices, and materials, particularly within contexts of increasing European integration. Research has shown that curricula, textbooks, and pedagogical practices are deeply influenced by national histories, cultures, and identity narratives (e.g., Tröhler 2023). At the same time, European education policy has increasingly promoted coordination, comparability, and mobility across national systems. Building on this growing body of research, the present study examines the relationship between Vocational Education and Training (VET) policy-making and national identity within a Europeanised policy space.

Historically, the aims of VET have been closely tied to economic development and labour market needs; however, VET systems are also embedded in broader societal and cultural practices (Elias 1995). Across Europe, countries hold distinct conceptualisations of vocational learning, apprenticeships, and professional education. These differences coexist with the EU’s soft governance mechanisms, such as the Copenhagen Process. As a result, national VET reforms often emerge from negotiations between European-level policy discourses and domestic traditions, priorities, and identities.

The link between VET and nationalism remains underexplored. To explore this link, we undertake a case study of VET reform in Malta, utilising documents and media. This reform, implemented between 2013 and 2016, introduced vocational subjects into secondary schooling. The aim is to understand how this reform was legitimised through references to external sources or through references to national identity. The research questions are: How was the reform in Malta legitimised? What externalisations were made to provide legitimation for policy change? How did national identity affect the legitimation of the reform?

Theoretically, we first turn to literature on policy borrowing (Phillips and Ochs 2003; Schriewer 1990; Steiner-Khamsi and Waldow 2012). Policy borrowing involves the adoption of policies or practices which are already in use elsewhere. Literature on policy borrowing also sheds light on the factors which lead to cross-national attraction, such as an internal dissatisfaction with current affairs and negative external evaluation. Additionally, external models become attractive because of similar guiding philosophies and aims. A different approach to studying policy borrowing is provided by looking at Schriewer’s (1999, 2000) work on ‘externalisation to world situations’. When nations search for viable solutions, they often reference foreign models, which he terms ‘externalisation’.

Secondly, we turn to the epistemic governance framework (Alasuutari and Qadir 2019). This framework seeks to understand the actions that actors take to gain approval and legitimacy for policy change, i.e., for governance. This governance involves work and actions, which are epistemic in nature. The term epistemic highlights that actors’ actions tap into some form of knowledge and understanding of societal understanding and views. Thus, when policy actors seek to bring about policy change, they seek to make references to societal understandings which support such changes. In this case, an understanding on epistemic governance helped shed light on how policy actors used media appearances and communications (i.e., epistemic work) to highlight how the new reform is legitimate through its connection with national identity and the support of external authoritative sources.

Finally, we make references to theory on nationalism (Tröhler 2023; Özkırımlı 2017). Following Özkırımlı (2017, 220), we see nationalism as “socially constituted and institutional”. Thus, nationalism is linked with a social understanding of national history and culture. This understanding is evident through discourse, images and symbols used (Billig 1995). Additionally, nationalism is institutional because it is enabled by societal structures and political actors (Brubaker 1996). In a Europeanised policy environment, nationalism does not disappear but is rearticulated, as national identity becomes a key resource through which European policy influences are interpreted, adapted, and legitimised.

The Erasmus+ CoVE ProVEST project (Professionalisation of Teachers and Mentors in Vocational Education to Realise Powerful Transformative Learning Environments for a Sustainable Transition) brings together 23 partners from five countries (Belgium, Estonia, France, Germany and Spain) to develop a professionalisation program for vocational education and training (VET) stakeholders. The project aims to strengthen collaboration between schools and enterprises and prepare teachers and mentors to equip learners with the skills required for Europe’s sustainable transition (The European Green Deal, 2021) and a rapidly changing labour market.

ProVEST promotes the establishment of broad, interdisciplinary and intersectoral teams that design and test powerful and transformative learning environments (Pauwels et al., 2023; Mezirow, 1978), integrating both sustainability (Mulvik et al., 2024) and digital competence. This is supported by a transnational masterclass open to educators and company mentors. A central feature of the ProVEST project is the multilingual online platform Edusynergy, which enables continuous evaluation and stakeholder feedback. It has been designed as a collaborative space for teachers and mentors to engage in peer exchange and to co-construct inclusive and sustainable learning environments. The platform hosts dozens of “germ cells” (Engeström et al., 2022; Isaac et al., 2025) — concrete examples of initiatives that can be adapted and implemented across different institutions and contexts. It seeks to bolster collective professional development and to advance the transition towards more sustainable learning environments through the sharing of educational practices.

Each partner has contributed projects to the online platform that align with the definition of Powerful and Transformative Learning Environments for Sustainability (PTLES), referring to educational settings designed to promote deep, collaborative, and sustainable learning. Such environments draw on principles such as critical reflection, self-regulated learning, interdisciplinary integration, authentic learning contexts and innovative use of technology.

After completing the description of their cases using a template embedded in the online Eduysnergy platform, partners underwent a round of online comments received from peers from the other countries of the consortium, based on an evaluation grid encompassing the principles of the PTLES model. This online collaboration among countries was possible thanks to the multilingual automatic translation. Schools and firms were asked to provide constructive feedback to other teams, by underlining the outstanding elements of the PTLES framework they retrieved, asking more information when needed, highlighting lacking elements that could be further developed, and giving suggestions based on their own experience in vocational education. Based on this feedback, schools and firms wrote on the collaborative platform an improved version (V2) of their cases, which will be used to design the masterclass.

This paper addresses the following research question: how do ProVEST partners’ integrations of peer feedback reveal shared priorities and contextual differences in applying the PTLES framework toward more inclusive and sustainable learning environments in VET?