Integrating the NMS in TTnet… …achievements and challenges Ronald Sultana Prague – 21/1/05

Key points  Integrating NMS in TTnet  The NMS and VET TT  TTnet achievements in the NMS  EU/TTnet added value  Funding the network  What makes a TTnet successful?

Process of integrating new members  ETF survey on VET-TT  Aalborg meeting (Nov 02)  CEDEFOP Restricted WG  Surveys among accession countries  Country frameworks  TTnet conferences (Dec 03/04)  Launching seminars in 6 NMS

TTnets launched in NMS  Role of founding members & institutional ‘nest’  Launch seminars: - March 12: Kaunas - April 21: Valletta - June 2: Ljubljana - June 4: Bratislava - June 15:Talinn - Sept 8: Budapest  21 Jan 05…PRAGUE

The NMS and the TT… standards firm links in-service VET strategy professionalisation career paths classroom mgt theory / practice Special needs Training in industry curriculumQualifications framework pedagogy use of ICTs APEL … key concerns

VET in ACCs: a synthesis  A field marked by reform Post-1989 liberalisation – Globalization forces – Accession  Several important initiatives - Legislative developments and measures - Social partnership model - LLL and CVT increasingly on agenda - Decentralisation and school autonomy - Linking education and enterprise - New VETcurricula – new assessment / certification / APL - Introduction of competency-based models - Increased pedagogical training - Learning from good practice in EU

VET teachers and trainers: a profile  Ageing, unstable, poorly paid profession  Majority of teachers are women  Many teachers / trainers are not formally trained  Pedagogical material/resources often outdated  Academic drift  Training often too theoretical  Traditional teaching models  Use of ICTs is limited  Distinction between VET theory & practice teachers

VET teachers and trainers: a profile  Insufficient I&CTE & training of VET teachers & trainers  Theory and practice de-linked  Limited opportunities for traineeships in industry  Poor cross-sectoral collaboration  Corps is not professionalised  National standards not yet formalised  Limited firm-based training - issue of SMEs  Lack of LM intelligence  Adult educators often part-time

National priorities: common themes Need to:  know who is in TT [a register]  bring sectors to same forum: mutual learning  professionalise service providers  draw up a list of competencies  develop common qualifications framework  establish standards and benchmarks  accredit TT with experience in the field

Some achievements b Training providers have started to meet Some national visibility through media Registration of trainers – developing a KB Participation in transnational projects: APL, Quality in TNA, e-TTCampus Linkage with ReferNet Organisation of seminars on TT Web-based resources and forums

EU / TTnet Added-value national EU priorities Establishing competencies / standards: an absolute necessity to ensure QUALITY local issues NMS issues EU-wide issues

The EU ‘label’ facilitates dialogue Forum Competence Standards Research Innovation Design TT courses

Funding the network  Different funding protocol: AC to NMS status…  Credibility of TTnet lies in attracting funding…  Danger of being led by ‘alien’ funding priorities…  Difficulty of generating national funding, or support for co-funding options…  Inexperience in bidding for tenders…  Understanding that ‘funding’ need not be only ‘financial’: TTnet’s role in knowledge transfer…

What makes a TTnet successful?  SMART objectives  Key group of people who push it  Supportive institutional ‘nest’  Resonates with real ‘local’ needs  Strong internal networking: regular ‘massage’  Representation from different sectors  Regular participation in TTnet activities  Members feel they are getting ‘something’  Partnership in transnational projects