Conference Agenda

Inclusion is a relevant issue in most education systems nowadays. Inclusive education should provide high quality education for all students. In terms of funding and public initiatives that target towards inclusion, however, gifted students are not usually the main target group (Borders et al., 2014). Yet, not only disadvantaged students should receive support, but also particularly gifted students should be given the opportunity to further develop their talents (Vötsch & Schneider, 2023). Promoting excellence in VET is an important agenda on the European level. This includes the provision of “high-quality education and training that values diverse backgrounds and talents, while ensuring relevance to the world of work” (ETF, 2025) as well as identifying gifted students who require intensified special support but might be overlooked when searching for solutions in harnessing human talent.

In Austria, the first initiatives to support gifted students started in the 1980s as segregated measures predominantly in secondary education. In 2009, the Austrian Ministry of Education issued the 'Basic Decree on the Promotion of Gifted and Talented Children', which requires inclusive support for gifted students throughout the school system. Over the past few decades, there have been various developments aimed at broadening the opportunities available to gifted students in the Austrian education system. These developments have included improvements to the legal framework, organisation and structure, as well as linguistic enhancements to legal documents. Several stakeholders are involved in the support of gifted students, including schools, business representatives, municipalities and higher education institutions (Resch & Rogl, 2024). Kuusisto et al. (2021) point out that gifted students have been somehow neglected within the Finnish education system. According to their analysis, supporting gifted students seems to be largely dependent on the initiatives of individual teachers, schools and parents. The ongoing discussion about the gifted education tends to revolve around basic and general upper-secondary education leaving the VET system out. Hence, the talent within the VET students or the practices supporting them remain mostly hidden, even when there is a variety of existing structures and processes for fostering the gifted within the VET. For example, several measures that target towards individualisation and acceleration have the potential to support gifted students in VET (Hong, 2025).

Subotnik et al. (2011, p. 7) observe that numerous definitions and terms are employed in gifted education research. Accordingly, the authors formulated a comprehensive definition, which can be employed across diverse academic domains, as it includes a wide range of aspects that are the subject of scientific consensus:

Giftedness is the manifestation of performance or production that is clearly at the upper end of the distribution in a talent domain even relative to that of other high-functioning individuals in that domain. Further, giftedness can be viewed as developmental, in that in the beginning stages, potential is the key variable; in later stages, achievement is the measure of giftedness; and in fully developed talents, eminence is the basis on which this label is granted. Psychosocial variables play an essential role in the manifestation of giftedness at every developmental stage. Both cognitive and psychosocial variables are malleable and need to be deliberately cultivated.

In our study, we want to shed a light on policies that support gifted students in the Austrian and Finish VET system.

Therefore, the following research questions are discussed in the presentation:

• Which strategies are used to support gifted students in the VET-system in Austria and in Finland?
• What are the similarities and what are the differences in strategies supporting gifted students in the field of VET between Austria and Finland?

The purpose of the study is to determine the effectiveness of the “Fact-Analysis-Comparison” method in improving students’ argumentation skills and to analyze the results of its application in educational practice. This study contributes to a wide-ranging international discussion on argumentation-based teaching in educational methodology. The study is designed to investigate the possibilities of using the “Fact-Analysis-Comparison” method in teaching mathematics, history, and economics in order to improve students’ argumentation skills. The action research (AR) study examines the theoretical foundations of the method, the features of its interdisciplinary use, and also analyzes the results of its implementation in the educational process. The study selected an activity-based approach that allows for a learning process that prioritizes student independence to develop argumentation skills. The study used theoretical analysis, observation, diagnostic tasks, practical work, and comparative analysis of results. A systematic study was conducted within the framework of the AR study, jointly conducted by teachers of mathematics, history, and economics. At the beginning of the year, this study was conducted to identify the most effective types of activities of 10-11th grade students that contribute to the development of argumentation skills. In the next stage, students were offered tasks specifically designed for the fact-analysis-comparison method. This work stimulated creativity, increased interest in the topic, and facilitated the search and synthesis of various information. During the study, several surveys were conducted among students and teachers, and student progress was analyzed quarterly over the course of one academic year. The results of the experiment showed that the systematic use of the fact-analysis-comparison method has a positive effect on the development of students' argumentation skills. Research questions: -How does the fact-analysis-comparison method affect students' argument-building skills? -What difficulties arise in developing argumentation skills and how to solve them? -What effective methods can be used to develop students' argumentation skills? Research objectives: -Analyze scientific and methodological literature on argumentation skills; -Determine the content and structure of the fact-analysis-comparison method; -Diagnose the initial level of students' argumentation skills; -Verify the effectiveness of the method in developing argumentation skills through practice; -Develop a system of tasks based on the use of the fact-analysis-comparison method; -Analyze the results of the study and draw conclusions. Research hypothesis: If the fact-analysis-comparison method is used systematically and purposefully in the learning process, then students' argumentation skills (argumentation, justification of thought, comparison) will develop to a significant level.

Literature review:

Argumentation is a key component of higher-order thinking and academic learning across disciplines. It allows students to construct, justify, and critically evaluate knowledge claims using evidence and reasoning (Toulmin, 1958). In educational research, argumentation has been linked to the development of critical thinking, metacognitive awareness, and epistemic knowledge (Kuhn, 1991; Osborne, 2010). Despite its importance, many studies report persistent difficulties among students in constructing high-quality arguments. These difficulties include poor use of evidence, limited justification of claims, and insufficient engagement with alternative perspectives (Kuhn & Udell, 2003; McNeill & Krajicek, 2012). Such findings highlight the need for specific pedagogical approaches that support the processes underlying argumentative reasoning. Identifying and evaluating facts represent key components of effective argumentation. Kuhn (1999) noted that epistemic development depends on students’ ability to distinguish between facts, explanations, and opinions. In classroom settings, students often rely on intuitive reasoning or authority-based inferences when factual support is lacking. Instructional frameworks such as the Claim-Evidence-Reasoning (CER) model specifically address this issue by guiding students to connect factual evidence to conceptual inferences through logical reasoning (McNeill & Krajcik, 2012).

Theoretical Framework

Fault diagnosis represents a central area of professional competence in the occupation of electronics technicians for automation technology (EA) at both national and international levels (Nickolaus & Geißel, 2009; Zinke, Schenk & Kröll, 2014). Curricular frameworks emphasize that trainees must be able to analyze complex relationships between symptoms and underlying causes and apply systematic strategies of troubleshooting and fault elimination (KMK, 2003). These requirements reflect the increasing complexity of industrial automation systems, in which diagnostic failures can lead to substantial downtime, safety risks, and economic losses. Despite the curricular emphasis on diagnostic competence, empirical studies indicate that many trainees experience difficulties in accurately identifying fault causes (Walker et al., 2015). This discrepancy suggests that the curricular goals regarding diagnostic proficiency are not fully met in practice.

A key gap in the current state of research concerns the lack of detailed analyses explaining why trainees struggle with fault diagnosis. Existing findings describe performance outcomes but do not sufficiently explore the underlying cognitive processes, diagnostic strategies, or information-processing patterns that shape successful or unsuccessful diagnoses. This lack of process-oriented understanding is problematic from a subject-didactic perspective, as meaningful instructional interventions require insights into the mechanisms of diagnostic thinking, not merely its outcomes.

To address this, the present study introduces a theoretical and methodological approach for analyzing diagnostic processes. Drawing on occupational and cognitive psychology (Schaper & Sonntag, 1997a, 1997b) as well as subject-specific didactics (Benda, 2008), fault diagnosis is conceptualized as action within search spaces (Klahr & Dunbar, 1988). According to this framework, diagnostic behavior unfolds through the navigation of different problem spaces, guided by specific cognitive strategies.

The literature suggests two central diagnostic strategies:

1. Symptomatic Strategy
   This strategy aligns with pattern-recognition theories and involves the activation of pre-compiled knowledge structures, such as familiar diagnostic scripts or previously encountered fault patterns. While efficient for routine or typical faults, it is limited when applied to unfamiliar or structurally complex problems.

2. Topographic Strategy
   This strategy emphasizes the construction of a mental representation of the system’s functional architecture. It relies on systematic information gathering, hypothesis testing along the system’s topology, and the integration of diverse data sources. Research suggests that this strategy is particularly effective in complex or non-routine diagnostic situations (Konradt, 1995; Hoc, 2000).

Whereas initial causal analyses have been conducted in other vocational domains—such as business education (Rausch et al., 2017) or automotive mechatronics (Abele, 2018)—no comparable research exists for electronics technicians for automation technology. Consequently, little is known about whether EA trainees rely predominantly on symptomatic, topographic, or hybrid strategies, and how these strategies relate to diagnostic success.

Research Questions
Addressing this deficit, the study systematically investigates:

a) To what extent can symptomatic, topographic, and hybrid diagnostic strategies be empirically identified in the diagnostic processes of EA trainees?
b) How are these process characteristics related to diagnostic outcomes, particularly the accuracy and quality of the final diagnosis?

In the context of rapid social, technological and labour market change, vocational education and training (VET) systems across Europe increasingly emphasise the development of learners’ capacity for lifelong learning. Alongside occupation-specific competencies, vocational learners are expected to acquire transversal skills that enable them to manage their own learning, adapt to new demands and engage proactively in continuous professional development (Cedefop, 2023). Within European education policy, learning to learn is defined as a key competence and is closely linked to learners’ ability to regulate their learning processes independently and purposefully (European Commission, 2019).

Self-regulated learning (SRL) is widely recognised as a foundational concept underpinning learning to learn and self-directed learning. SRL refers to learners’ active and constructive engagement in planning, monitoring, regulating and evaluating their learning through cognitive, motivational and behavioural processes (Pintrich, 2000; Zimmerman, 2002). From a social-cognitive perspective, self-regulated learners set goals, select and adapt strategies, manage their time and learning environment, and reflect on outcomes in order to improve future performance (Zimmerman, 2000, 2013). Research has consistently demonstrated that strong SRL skills are associated with higher academic achievement, greater motivation, and better coping with learning difficulties (Jossberger et al., 2010; Zimmerman & Bandura, 1994).

In vocational education, SRL is particularly important due to the applied and often complex nature of vocational learning, which requires learners to integrate theoretical knowledge with practical tasks and workplace-related demands. However, previous studies have raised concerns about vocational students’ learning skills, especially in relation to planning, time management, organisation and sustained engagement with learning tasks (de Bruijn & Leeman, 2011; Sirk, 2025). Much of this research has relied on vocational teachers’ perceptions and has tended to portray vocational students and particularly adolescents, as having weak self-regulatory skills. At the same time, vocational student populations in many European countries are highly heterogeneous, encompassing a wide age range and diverse educational backgrounds (Boldrini et al., 2019; Sirk, 2025), which suggests that SRL skills and related difficulties may manifest in varied ways.

Despite the growing recognition of SRL as a crucial competence for VET and lifelong learning, there is still limited empirical research that foregrounds vocational students’ own perspectives on their self-regulated learning skills and the difficulties they experience in regulating their learning. Understanding how learners themselves perceive their regulatory capacities is essential for designing pedagogical practices that provide appropriate and differentiated support. This is particularly relevant in European VET systems that aim to promote inclusion, learner autonomy and sustainable learning pathways (Cedefop, 2023).

Against this backdrop, the overarching research question guiding this conference presentation is: How do vocational students’ self-regulated learning skills manifest, and what kinds of difficulties do they experience in regulating their learning?