Systemvarianten beruflicher Qualifizierung : Eine schottisch-englische Vergleichsskizze im Zeichen der Modularisierungsdebatte

Lade...
Vorschaubild
Dateien
Zu diesem Dokument gibt es keine Dateien.
Datum
2001
Autor:innen
Pilz, Matthias
Herausgeber:innen
Kontakt
ISSN der Zeitschrift
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliografische Daten
Verlag
Schriftenreihe
Auflagebezeichnung
ArXiv-ID
Internationale Patentnummer
Angaben zur Forschungsförderung
Projekt
Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Open Access Green
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz
Gesperrt bis
Titel in einer weiteren Sprache
Forschungsvorhaben
Organisationseinheiten
Zeitschriftenheft
Publikationstyp
Zeitschriftenartikel
Publikationsstatus
Published
Erschienen in
Bildung und Erziehung. 2001, 54(4), pp. 439-458. ISSN 0006-2456. eISSN 2194-3834. Available under: doi: 10.7788/bue.2001.54.4.439
Zusammenfassung

The problem which generates the motivation for comparing VET systems can be seen in the present and refers to the fact that the vocational education and training systems of Europe have one common trait: They differ sharply from one another. The differences in education and training between nations are not always apparent at first sight but surely well up whenever it comes to European integration. The question is whether this may also be said when looking at „intra-national" comparisons or „home internationals". In the case of England and Scotland „individual" training infrastructures may also be traced back to and reconstructed from deep-rooted traditions. On the other hand, the two countries' „educational landscapes" in general appear similar at first sight while two common features of the VET systems strike the eye: the firm belief that companies should be responsible for training and, secondly, the well-documented inclination to implement and even enforce a policy of establishing national qualification frameworks based on modular principles and linked to competence-based assessment. Against this background the article depicts some of the major differences between the two „countries".

Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache
Fachgebiet (DDC)
330 Wirtschaft
Schlagwörter
Konferenz
Rezension
undefined / . - undefined, undefined
Zitieren
ISO 690PILZ, Matthias, Thomas DEISSINGER, 2001. Systemvarianten beruflicher Qualifizierung : Eine schottisch-englische Vergleichsskizze im Zeichen der Modularisierungsdebatte. In: Bildung und Erziehung. 2001, 54(4), pp. 439-458. ISSN 0006-2456. eISSN 2194-3834. Available under: doi: 10.7788/bue.2001.54.4.439
BibTex
@article{Pilz2001Syste-34372,
  year={2001},
  doi={10.7788/bue.2001.54.4.439},
  title={Systemvarianten beruflicher Qualifizierung : Eine schottisch-englische Vergleichsskizze im Zeichen der Modularisierungsdebatte},
  number={4},
  volume={54},
  issn={0006-2456},
  journal={Bildung und Erziehung},
  pages={439--458},
  author={Pilz, Matthias and Deißinger, Thomas}
}
RDF
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/34372">
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/34372/1/Pilz_0-342191.pdf"/>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/46"/>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dc:creator>Pilz, Matthias</dc:creator>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/46"/>
    <dcterms:abstract>The problem which generates the motivation for comparing VET systems can be seen in the present and refers to the fact that the vocational education and training systems of Europe have one common trait: They differ sharply from one another. The differences in education and training between nations are not always apparent at first sight but surely well up whenever it comes to European integration. The question is whether this may also be said when looking at „intra-national" comparisons or „home internationals". In the case of England and Scotland „individual" training infrastructures may also be traced back to and reconstructed from deep-rooted traditions. On the other hand, the two countries' „educational landscapes" in general appear similar at first sight while two common features of the VET systems strike the eye: the firm belief that companies should be responsible for training and, secondly, the well-documented inclination to implement and even enforce a policy of establishing national qualification frameworks based on modular principles and linked to competence-based assessment. Against this background the article depicts some of the major differences between the two „countries".</dcterms:abstract>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/34372"/>
    <dc:language>deu</dc:language>
    <dcterms:issued>2001</dcterms:issued>
    <dcterms:title>Systemvarianten beruflicher Qualifizierung : Eine schottisch-englische Vergleichsskizze im Zeichen der Modularisierungsdebatte</dcterms:title>
    <dc:contributor>Deißinger, Thomas</dc:contributor>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2016-06-13T13:32:54Z</dc:date>
    <dc:creator>Deißinger, Thomas</dc:creator>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights>
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/34372/1/Pilz_0-342191.pdf"/>
    <dc:contributor>Pilz, Matthias</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2016-06-13T13:32:54Z</dcterms:available>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
Interner Vermerk
xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter
Kontakt
URL der Originalveröffentl.
Prüfdatum der URL
Prüfungsdatum der Dissertation
Finanzierungsart
Kommentar zur Publikation
Allianzlizenz
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
Internationale Co-Autor:innen
Universitätsbibliographie
Nein
Begutachtet
Diese Publikation teilen