Towards a strong career learning environment: results from a Dutch longitudinal study

ABSTRACT

To prepare students for the flexible labour market of nowadays, schools are increasingly acknowledging their responsibility to guide students in their career development. The project ‘Career Orientation and Guidance in Secondary Vocational Education’ was developed to encourage Dutch schools to initiate and/or continue the creation of a strong career learning environment for their students. Central in this learning environment is a dialogue with the students, where meaning is attached to concrete experiences with work. This longitudinal study is designed to gain theoretical and practical insight into the influence of the project. Results show that, although the school’s vision on career orientation and guidance is clear to the teachers, it is not supported by all of them. It appears that the renewed vision is imposed on the teachers, and this absence of a shared and widely supported vision appears to withhold the teachers and the project managers to engage in collective action.

KEYWORDS:

• Career education
• career guidance
• professional development
• qualitative methods

1. Introduction

Most careers do not develop within clear boundaries anymore and, therefore, are to a large extent unpredictable (Arthur, Khapova, & Wilderom, 2005; Pryor & Bright, 2011). To prepare their students for a flexible labour market, schools are increasingly acknowledging their responsibility to guide students in their career development (Sultana, 2004). They embrace the idea of developing different skills that are needed for meeting the demands of the labour market, such as the ability to show flexibility based on commitment to work and commitment to the employer in changing times (Hillage, Regan, Dickson, & McLoughlin, 2002; Lafer, 2004; Schulz, 2008). This embracing happens, however, without realising that such skills require a different learning environment than when the focus was on traditional technical competencies (Payne, 2000; Smith & Comyn, 2004). As a result, the aim of school-based career guidance is still mainly on helping students towards their academic achievement, and not on helping them to construct their career wish and prepare for their work roles and career competencies after their education (Winters, 2012).

Students in Western Europe are increasingly dependent on career counselling services that schools provide, since the delivery by an external service is mostly eliminated (Hooley, Watts, & Andrews, 2015; Hughes, Meijers, & Kuijpers, 2015). However, most schools do not have the financial means to provide students with career guidance by professional career counsellors. Therefore, teachers in Dutch vocational education have to act as career counsellors, mostly without receiving suitable training and support to do so (Oomen, Van den Dungen, Pijls, & Egelie, 2012). This role is found quite difficult by teachers (Mittendorff, 2010; Winters, 2012). Consequently, students do not receive the guidance they need to become successful in directing their own career on the current labour market.

To provide more training for teachers, and – more generally – to boost the existence of a career learning environment in vocational education, in 2012 the Dutch Ministry of Education financed the national developmental project ‘Career Orientation and Guidance in Secondary Vocational Education’ (COG/SVE). In this article we present data from a longitudinal research project into the effectiveness of this national project, regarding the creation of a so-called ‘strong’ career learning environment.

1.1. Strong career learning environments

Kuijpers, Meijers, and Gundy (2011), Kuijpers and Meijers (2012) and Meijers, Kuijpers, and Gundy (2013) suggest that a learning environment that prepares students for a precarious labour market should focus on the development of particular career competencies and a career identity. Central in this ‘strong’ career learning environment is a dialogue with the students, where meaning is attached to concrete experiences with work. A learning environment aiming at the development of career competencies and a career identity should therefore be practice-based, and focus on dialogues with the students in which their thoughts and feelings have a central place. Furthermore, it offers students a growing autonomy regarding the choices they make, to develop their ability to give direction to their careers. This learning environment differs considerably from a traditional one by not primarily focussing on information transfer and a monologue, and not gearing towards a standard learning-route.

Since August 2000, secondary vocational schools in the Netherlands are obliged to offer career guidance services without charging the user, as part of the EU’s policy on ‘lifelong career guidance’ (Oomen et al., 2012). However, strong career learning environments are still to a large extent missing in Dutch education, including in vocational schools (Hughes et al., 2015). Teachers find it rather difficult to provide career guidance and, more specifically, they find it difficult to conduct reflective career conversations with students (Mittendorff, 2010; Winters, 2012). Research showed that in conversations about work placements teachers talk to the student 65% of the time, 21% of the time they talk about the student and only 9% of the time with the student (Winters, Meijers, Kuijpers, & Baert, 2009). The main reason seems to be a lack of teachers’ dialogical skills in combination with a professional identity that is focused on transfer of knowledge and providing feedback in a rather monological manner (Winters, 2012).

The most important aspect of the career learning environment, the dialogical culture, is therefore particularly absent. As teacher professional development is regarded to be crucial for educational change (Lieberman & Pointer Mace, 2008), a training on conducting career dialogues with students could be the starting point of a transformation towards a career learning environment.

1.2. Project COG/SVE

In 2012 the project COG/SVE was developed to encourage vocational educational institutions to initiate and/or continue the creation of a strong career learning environment for their students. This project was financed by the Dutch Ministry of Education, and implemented by MBO Diensten (SVE services), a project office that carries out different innovative projects in vocational education. In the project, 37 secondary vocational schools (students age 16–20) in the Netherlands receive professional guidance (a) to develop a ‘strong’ (i.e. dialogical) career learning environment by training teachers in conducting dialogical career conversations, and (b) to underpin this strong learning environment by a well-developed vision and policy on career guidance in schools.

The training programme consists of an off-the-job and on-the-job stage, because an off-the-job training programme for teachers proved to be insufficient to achieve significant changes in guidance conversations (Meijers & Kuijpers, 2014). In combination with individual coaching and team coaching on-the-job, however, the programme proved to be effective in improving guidance conversations (Kuijpers & Meijers, 2015).

In the off-the-job stage, which takes a total of three days with periods of two to four weeks in between, the emphasis is on explaining the theory and putting the theory into practice in career conversations. In the on-the-job stage, the emphasis is on the translation of the training to the school environment. All teachers in the team take part in a four-session in-school training programme (two individual and two team sessions) with school coaches (teachers that received an extended training programme), using video recorded guidance conversations of the participants as a starting point for learning. Furthermore, the teachers were trained through role playing activities and provision of recent theoretical insights about career dialogues aimed at life designing. The teachers are taught to encourage the students to develop their career competencies by asking them specific questions. Finally, attention is paid to affective components of the conversations. National trainers train both the school coaches and the teacher teams off-the-job and they also support the part of the training that takes place on-the-job.

In addition, the participating schools receive professional guidance to integrate a student-centered approach in the schools’ vision and policy on career guidance. The project guides every participating school in creating a renewed vision and policy on career guidance that offers students freedom of choice and real life work experiences, and is consistent with the values of the individual schools.

1.3. Reculturing of schools

The aim of the COG/SVE project is to encourage the creation of a different learning environment for students, from a traditional to a dialogical and career-based learning environment. This development asks for a change of the organisational culture of the schools. Peterson and Spencer (1991, p. 143) define organisational culture as ‘the deeply embedded patterns of organisational behaviour and the shared values, assumptions, beliefs, or ideologies that members have about their organization and its work’. Therefore, changing a school’s culture requires changing these deeply embedded patterns and shared values, which should not be taken lightly (Blood & Thorsborne, 2005). All stakeholders must acknowledge the fact that changing the culture of the school happens gradually over a long period of time, and patience is required (Fullan, Cuttress, & Kilcher, 2009).

Reculturing is a process of co-creating new meanings to situations of ambiguity and uncertainty on a dialogical basis (Fullan, 2007; Geijsel, Meijers, & Wardekker, 2007).

Co-creating new and shared meanings implies collective learning and working of teachers (Fullan, 2007). Research has shown a positive relationship between collective learning and teams’ performance and innovativeness (Lodders, 2013). Following Lodders (2013, p. 15), collective learning

refers to the work-related learning processes that arise when the members of a collective collaborate and consciously strive for common learning and/or working outcomes. Such learning may result in long term changes in skills, knowledge attitudes and learning abilities, or changes in work processes or work outcomes, signifying development and change respectively.

In her research, Lodders (2013) constructed a six-phase model for the cyclical process of collective learning, and engaging in the different phases of the model is needed to realise shared organisational ambitions. The first phase of this model, establishing a shared vision, is considered as a highly important feature of collective learning, and should not be imposed by authority, but should represent a collective intent and shared meaning (Akkerman, Petter, & de Laat, 2008). Thereafter, the teacher teams generate information and ideas about the learning process, by means of hypothetical questions and about complaints and errors, drawn from external and internal sources. To establish that everyone in the organisation is informed about this generated information, distribution is required. This collective information base is the input for the fourth phase, of the dialogue and dialogical learning attitude, where the generated and distributed information is collectively interpreted. As Lodders (2013, p. 17) describes it:

As multiple interpretations of the information generated and distributed may exist, ‘collective learning’ requires insight into the different interpretations by different people, as well as dialogue ( … ) aimed at constructing shared meaning. In this type of dialogue people mutually explore ideas, questions, and potential actions.

The dialogue does not always lead to similar interpretations, but to a shared understanding that commences organisational actions. The process of imposing this shared reality on the environment, is the phase of collective action. The learning process eventually has to lead to actual changes in work, where individual members of the collective take action to contribute to the collective goals of the group. Finally, the sixth phase of evaluation and reflection is essential ‘to close the learning cycle and provide input for subsequent learning cycles by providing insight into the efficacy of the collective members’ behaviours and actions’ (Lodders, 2013, p. 18). The process, the outcomes and the interaction between the members during the learning process are important subjects of the evaluation, as this explicates the nature of the learning process and stimulates future collective learning.

Establishing a shared vision among the members of the collective, the first phase of the collective learning process, asks for transformational leaders who are able to initiate and guide this establishment (Geijsel, 2015). Initiating and guiding the development of a shared vision to direct and inspire the collective within an innovation, is an important dimension of transformational leadership. This leadership style focusses on realising a culture change by creating a work environment in which teachers work together optimally and in which they strongly identify themselves with the commonly created goals of the school (Lodders, 2013; Ten Bruggencate, 2009). Besides the dimension of initiating this shared vision for the future as opposed to imposing a new vision on the team, a transformational leadership style is characterised by intellectual stimulation and individual support (Geijsel, 2015). Intellectual stimulation refers to the supervisor’s support of the professional development of the teachers, and the challenge to readdress their knowledge and daily practice. It encourages teachers to question their own beliefs, assumptions and values, and to be critical towards themselves and their colleagues. Therefore, it can improve teamwork by solving individual as well as team problems. Providing individualised consideration and support refers to leaders attending the feelings and needs of individual teachers. By functioning as a role model and coach who delegates tasks and gives feedback, leaders can elevate the potential of each of the team members (Geijsel, Sleegers, Stoel, & Krüger, 2009; Lodders, 2013; Oude Groote Beverborg, Sleegers, & Van Veen, 2015). Transformational leadership can be exercised by individuals as well as by groups (distributed leadership; see Bolden, 2011; Bush & Glover, 2014; Harris, 2004).

Lodders (2013) found that transformational leadership had direct positive effects on the collective learning process of the teachers, as well as an indirect effect via individual learning in interaction. In her research, indications were found that a transformational leadership style influences team results directly and indirectly by stimulating collective learning. Furthermore, it has been found that transformational leadership is positively related to teachers’ engagement in professional learning activities and to teachers’ motivation for practicing their profession (Runhaar, Sanders, & Yang, 2010; Thoonen, Sleegers, Oort, Peetsma, & Geijsel, 2011). Additionally, research of Thoonen, Sleegers, Oort, and Peetsma (2012) suggests that the dimensions of transformational leadership are important for building school-wide capacity for change and improvement.

Considering culture change to be more effective when transformational in nature (Blood & Thorsborne, 2005), we argue that a change in the learning environment for students in vocational education requires a collective learning process of teacher teams, guided by a transformational leadership style.

2. Research aim and questions

This longitudinal study is designed to gain theoretical and practical insight into the influence of the project ‘COG/SVE’ on the creation of a strong career learning environment. Moreover, this article describes how teachers and project managers of these schools perceive the developments in their own learning environment and the learning environment of their students, since the start of the project. Three research questions will therefore be investigated:

1. How and to what extent does the project ‘COG/SVE’ accomplish strong career learning environments that are dialogical, practice- and inquiry-based?

2. To what extent does the project stimulate collective learning of the teachers?

3. To what extent is transformational leadership present, needed to promote the development of a strong career learning environment?

3. Method

3.1. Sample and procedure

The results described in this article are part of a longitudinal qualitative study, designed to investigate to what extent the project COG/SVE is an impulse for structural and cultural changes in the career learning environment in vocational education. We want to explore the influence of the project, over a time period of three years, in which four measurements are foreseen. In this article we describe the results of the first and second measurement of this longitudinal study, to determine which processes were immediately initiated in the first term after the training days of the teachers.

As part of the COG/SVE project, two central training days were organised for 238 teachers from 20 participating schools in 6 different regions of the Netherlands over the period of September to December 2013. Over the period of October 2013 to January 2014, all participating teachers were approached for a semi-structured interview at a place and time of their choice. At the start of the first training day, the teachers completed a questionnaire on their personal motivation and aspirations regarding the project, and the existence of their schools’ policy and vision on career orientation and guidance. Teachers with contrasting scores on the questionnaire were personally approached, to realise maximum variation sampling (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014). Eventually, 50 teachers from 18 different schools from all parts of the Netherlands agreed to participate. Of the interviewed teachers 33 are female. All teachers participated on a voluntary basis and their anonymity was guaranteed.

In April 2014, the one (or in some cases two) project manager(s) from each of the at the time 34 participating schools were approached for a semi-structured interview at a place and time of their choice. Eventually, 38 project managers of 33 different secondary vocational education schools agreed to participate. Of the interviewed project managers 23 are female, and one of the project managers is also a participant in the teacher sample of our study.

For an overview of the timeline of our study and the number of respondents participating in each measurement, see Table 1.

Table 1. Timeline measurements and respondents.

	Period 1 Sept.–Dec. 2013	Period 2 Oct. 2013–Jan. 2014	Period 3 April–June 2014
Central training days	238 participants
Teacher interviews		N = 50	N = 48
Project manager interviews			N = 38

3.2. Measures

Teacher interviews During period 2 data were collected by conducting individual interviews with all 50 participating teachers. The interviews were semi-structured, and therefore open for the topics the teachers wanted to discuss. The researchers monitored a list of topics that had to be covered: views on the (collective) learning process in the COG/SVE project, any visible changes in the learning environment, and desires and ambitions for the future in the area of COG. Example questions of the semi-structured interviews are: ‘What changes do you see?’, and ‘What dilemma’s or obstacles do you experience?’ Because of our interest in the stories of the teachers regarding the development of a career learning environment, the nature of the interviews was open and informal, and the teachers were therefore invited to share their ideas and opinions. Since we are interested in true understanding of the process that the teachers undergo, this interview-method contributes to the validity of the study (Boeije, 2010). The shortest interview took 12 minutes, the longest 56 minutes, with an average of 21 minutes. Almost all interviews (47) were recorded with a video camera, one interview was conducted via Skype (and also recorded), and one teacher answered the questions in writing. One interview was conducted through a non-recorded telephone conversation, where notes were taken during the interview, and these notes were processed directly after. This resulted in 47 interview transcripts, 1 interview version in writing, and 1 interview report. Thirty-eight interviews took place in the schools where the teachers worked, and nine took place at the location of the training days. The first author conducted 36 of the 50 interviews, a second researcher conducted the remaining 14 interviews.

Over the time-span of period 3, the first author conducted the same semi-structured interviews with 48 of the 50 participating teachers, to determine any changes in the (collective) learning process and the learning environment after five or six months. One teacher was unavailable due to long-lasting illness, and one other teacher did not participate due to lack of time. During this measurement, seven interviews took place in the schools where the teachers worked, and were recorded with a video camera. The other 41 interviews were conducted through non-recorded telephone conversations, where notes were taken during each interview and these notes were processed directly after the interview. Although these notes are a chronological documenting of events and were processed directly after the interview, the events cannot be encountered more than once, and it is possible this led to a loss of some information. This resulted in 7 interview transcripts and 41 interview reports. The recorded face-to-face interviews took between 16 and 56 minutes, with an average of 35 minutes.

Project manager interviews During period 3, the first author conducted 32 semi-structured interviews with 38 project managers of 33 schools. The nature of the interviews was open and informal, but a list of topics was used that had to be covered: the process of creating, documenting and distributing the renewed vision on career guidance, distributing and embedding the new policy on career guidance, and perceived results of and changes since the start of the COG/SVE project. Example questions of the semi-structured interviews are: ‘How is the developed vision on COG established within your school?’ and ‘What has specifically changed in the schools’ policy on career guidance?’. The shortest interview took 22 minutes, the longest 1 hour and 11 minutes, with an average of 43 minutes. Twenty-eight of the interviews were conducted face-to-face, and audio-recorded. The other four interviews were conducted through non-recorded telephone conversations, where notes were taken during each interview. Accordingly, our study is strengthened through triangulation, by using distinctive data sources (Miles et al., 2014).

3.3. Analysis

All of the interview transcripts and reports from the first as well as the second measurement, and with the teachers as well as the project managers, were analysed with the qualitative data analysis program Nvivo10, by use of a bottom-up, iterative, and inductive coding approach (Miles et al., 2014; Mortelmans, 2011). Each of the three data sets led to a unique codebook, constructed initially by the verbally transcribed interviews of each set, and thereafter complemented by the interview reports. Categories and relationships between the categories were formulated by observations of the data, and descriptive codes and sub codes were given to different categories, for example: ‘Changes regarding COG’ and ‘Leadership and role management’. This adding of codes continued until saturation took place. Strongly overlapping codes were merged, such as ‘Distributing in the form of training’ and ‘Organising workshops’. After the coding and data condensation process we conducted a variable-oriented cross case analysis, in order to detect themes that cut across cases and to explore differences and similarities between the cases (Miles et al., 2014) for each of the three data sets. The data of the teachers of the first and second measurements were compared to detect differences and similarities in the form and content of the interviews, that indicate a (lack of) process of development between the two measurements. Furthermore, the form and content of the interviews with the teachers, and the emphasised themes within the interviews were compared to those of the interviews with the project managers, to indicate similarities and differences in the way they perceived the process of the innovation.

To determine the inter-rater reliability of the coding process, Cohen’s Kappa was calculated. This is a measurement for the agreement between two raters, with measures occurring by chance taken into account. For this purpose, a second analyst was trained to use the framework of the first measurement, and five interviews (10%) were selected randomly for recoding. Cohen’s Kappa was 0.82. A third analyst was trained to use the two frameworks of the second measurement, and again 10% of the interviews (respectively 5 and 4) were randomly selected for recoding. For the teachers’ interviews Cohen’s Kappa was 0.90, and for the project managers’ interviews Cohen’s Kappa was 0.87. All three of these levels are considered as acceptable (Lombard, Snyder-Duch, & Campanella Bracken, 2002) to almost perfect (Landis & Koch, 1977).

4. Results

4.1. Career learning environment

A strong career learning environment consists of three characteristics: it is dialogical, practice based, and provides room for the students to make their own choices. Firstly, we analysed the date to determine whether the teachers and the project managers report experienced changes on these dimensions.

During the first interview with the teachers in 2013, right after the two day training programme of the project, most teachers spoke about their increased conversational skills for conducting career dialogues with their students, although further improvement of these skills was often wished for. Furthermore, 17 of the teachers stated it was too early in the process to see any results with the students. During the second interview with the teachers in 2014 the dialogue with their students was an important topic again. As during the first interview, teachers still felt a need to improve their dialogical skills. The teachers stated that, compared to the first interview, their conversations with their students were increasingly about the students’ careers, and some teachers mentioned that they got positive feedback from their students on the way the dialogues were conducted.

Students give back that they found the conversations enjoyable, rather than always talking about achievements. It is a step towards their next choice, which is received positively.

The topic of the interviews with the project managers, interviewed in 2014, was primarily the formulation of the schools’ renewed vision document on career orientation and guidance and the way they were involved in this formulation. These vision documents were mostly focused on the development of the career competencies of students, but in some vision documents the goal of a strong career learning environment was specifically formulated.

Gaining experience, ensuring processing the career competencies ( … ), which are, in any case, the base. And we have also formulated nine goals to actually implement the vision before 2017. That is what we want to achieve.

On most schools this vision document was distributed among colleagues. However, the project managers only occasionally (7) spoke about actually noticing that this vision document made some form of impact on their colleagues, for example, expressed enthusiasm or commitment to the innovation. Numerous project managers spoke about developing training and workshops on career guidance for their colleagues, as a result of the renewed vision on career guidance. Furthermore, about one third of the project managers spoke about integrating ‘COG’ in the schools’ curriculum, by scheduling COG classes with exercises focused on real life work experiences and developing the career competencies (4), or by integrating COG exercises in previously existing classes (6). However, except for designing these training and classes, the development of a renewed vision had resulted mostly in plans for implementation, some more specific than others, and not (yet) in actual implementation.

That is a pretty logical step, that you first share the vision within your team and then see how you need to integrate it into your programme, and finally what you need to make it happen.

We want everyone in the organisation on the same page, but this takes time. We have managed to be able to find each other in this area, but we will see in the implementation of it if this is embraced. It takes a few years to put this on the agenda.

In conclusion, it appears that the creation of the dialogical aspect of the learning environment had further developed, but the interviewed teachers did not mention a development in the creation of a practice- and inquiry-based curriculum. The project managers, however, were focused on constructing a practice- and inquiry-based curriculum. This indicates the absence of communication between the participating teachers and the project managers, which has led to different perspectives on the COG/SVE project and a lack of awareness about the aspired development of a strong career learning environment with the teachers.

4.2. Collective learning of teachers

To structure the results regarding the collective learning process of the teachers, we used the six-phase model of Lodders (2013). These phases include: shared vision, information generation, information distribution, dialogue and dialogical learning attitude, collective action, and evaluation and reflection.

All project managers described the development of a shared vision regarding career orientation and guidance reported in the developed vision documents, which should function as the starting point for the collective learning process of the teachers. However, most interviewed teachers participated in the two-day training programme without being aware of this school wide vision and therefore there was no ‘collective intent and shared meaning’ (Lodders, 2013) at the start of the process.

What I want to tell you, well, that might be a bit of how our team responded to this COG training. Well, what would have been convenient …  it was more the how and why. We were told: then and then you are expected to be somewhere. But what the reason is? We do not know.

During the second interview with the teachers, there appeared to be more clarity on the form and goal of the project, and on the schools renewed vision regarding career orientation and guidance. However, the differences in the way teachers and their colleagues perceived their responsibility in school-based career guidance was mentioned as an obstacle for the implementation. Various project managers spoke about these differences in the teachers’ perception of their role as career guides as well, and the experienced resistance from the teachers during the training on career guidance.

We have a population of old teachers who say, well: ‘I teach my class, and the rest of the responsibility lies with the students themselves and with society.’

Information generation from internal as well as external sources about this specific learning process was not often discussed by the teachers during the second interview. It appeared that most of them were not actively looking for more information on career orientation and guidance or the COG/SVE project specifically, but we did not concretely asked them about this phase of the collective learning process and, therefore, we cannot say whether this information generation took place. However, the project managers mentioned that they were active in generating information about the COG/SVE project, but mainly from external sources. MBO Diensten, the innovative project office that carries out the COG/SVE project, provided a website, and organised conferences and workshops. MBO Diensten also organised regional sharing-sessions, where the project managers of different schools could exchange their experiences with the COG/SVE project. These sessions were often mentioned by the project managers as an important source of their inspiration and information. By organising training and workshops on conducting career dialogues with students and spreading the newly developed vision document, the information distribution was taking place on a large scale by the time of the second interview, while during the first interview this distribution was often named as a wish or ambition. However, in the second interview the teachers still wished for more training on the COG skills. Furthermore, nearly all of the teachers stated they experienced participating in the COG/SVE project as a learning process, and most of them preferred to learn together instead of by themselves, which potentially showed their dialogical learning attitude.

I feel like COG is certainly a learning process, I learn from it every day. For myself as well; which way do I want to go? What and who do I need?

The on-the-job part, that consisted of individual training, feedback on recorded dialogues with students and other forms of peer-to-peer coaching, did not take place yet at the time of the first interview. However, this phase was increasingly mentioned by the teachers during the second interview, but this time not just as a wish but as an existing dialogical feedback activity, where they collectively interpreted the generated and distributed information. Nonetheless, there appeared to be a great wish for a form of follow-up on the off-the-job training days.

Communication between the teachers about this would also be nice; we did not have a follow-up moment after the training days.

Both the project managers as well as the teachers reported no activities on the last two phases of the six-phase model of the collective learning process during the second measurement. Collective action where the new shared career guidance reality would be imposed on the school environment almost exclusively existed in implementation plans, and evaluation and reflection was not at issue yet since the project and therefore the learning process was still ongoing.

In conclusion, at the time of the second interview the teachers of the participating schools were more engaged in collective learning regarding conducting a career dialogue than before, in the form of in school training on conducting career dialogues, but mostly in the form of the increasingly occurring on-the-job stage and developed workshops and training on COG. Following Lodders’ (2013) six-phase model of the collective learning process, the last but crucial phases of collective action and evaluation and reflection were not (yet) implemented, since most teachers and project managers were still in the phase of distributing the information and interpreting this together in the form of feedback, workshops and training.

4.3. Transformational leadership

Transformational leadership, the required leadership style to establish culture change, is characterised by the elements of initiating and guiding a shared vision, intellectual stimulation and individualised support.

The participating teachers in the first interview were very much in need of clarity on the schools’ vision and policy on career guidance; they specifically asked for information about this vision, and did not speak about the existence of the development of a renewed vision document. Furthermore, many teachers stated that they did not get any information about their participation in the training days beforehand by their (team)supervisor, even if they asked their supervisors for explanation. Close to all teachers did not seem to be aware of the training days being part of a bigger, school wide project. Therefore, there was a great lack of clarity on the form, goal and priority of the project as well.

I think, yes well fine, but what does the school want with this? How important is it to our team leaders? What kind of place will it get? Now we are sent there and yes, I find it pretty vague.

During the second interview the teachers spoke about the COG/SVE project and its consequences with increased clarity (without being asked about it), except for several of them who still mentioned being still uncertain about the goal of the project or the way their supervisors prioritised it. However, most teachers did not feel supported in the innovation process. They felt like their supervisors are not (sufficiently) concerned with the COG/SVE project, and therefore did not give any direction and facilitation regarding the continuation of the project after the two off-the-job training days, despite the importance of the project to certain teachers.

What happens to many things, is that it is characterised as important, and eventually it dies a quiet death. We are really getting something out of it, so that's a real shame. It is a good tool, but there are other priorities to the management. Too busy with other tasks. There should be more pressure from the management, and a good written plan.

About half of the interviewed project managers felt like their school management did not give the innovation of the COG/SVE project enough priority as well, but another large part felt like their management did. However, numerous project managers spoke about their wishes to involve their management more in the process of the reculturing and mentioned their ideas on how to increase this involvement.

We must try to excite, and maybe even organise a workshop for the educational managers. Because I feel that if we as an organisation know what we are talking about and the managers know what we mean, that it will settle better.

Furthermore, during the first as well as the second interview most teachers felt a great lack of facilitation in the form of time and physical room for practicing their dialogical career skills. This was mentioned by respectively 36 and 28 teachers.

About half of the teachers of the second interview were asked about the way they perceived their individual qualities and ambitions were taken into account by their supervisors regarding professional development in general. Most of them (12) found that this was the case, 5 found that this was certainly not the case, and the few others told us that it depended on the circumstances.

Some [supervisors] see my qualities and aspirations, and use them, and encourage me, include me in things.

Furthermore, most of the interviewed teachers told us they felt like there was enough room for their own professional development at their schools. Overall it seemed like most of the teachers experienced intellectual stimulation from their supervisors, in the form of support for their professional development regarding COG and in general.

In conclusion, between the first and second measurement interviews with the teachers, there was a positive development regarding the clarity on the form and goal of the project, but the interviewed teachers missed direction, facilitation, and support from their supervisors for integrating the new policy on career guidance in their schools. Furthermore, half of the interviewed project managers experienced this lack of support from their management as well, and many of the project managers felt like more engagement from their managers would help the implementation process of the COG/SVE project. However, most teachers did feel like their supervisor stimulates their professional development.

5. Conclusion and discussion

Previous research suggests that the creation of a strong career learning environment is needed to enable students developing career competencies and a career identity. To create such a learning environment, collective learning of teachers is essential. On a management level, transformational leadership is necessary to initiate and guide the development of a shared vision, which is the start of the collective learning process of teachers. The aim of this study is to investigate the influence of the project ‘COG/SVE’ on the creation of strong career learning environments in Dutch secondary vocational education. Moreover, we investigated to what extent a collective learning process of the teachers and a transformational leadership style exist.

The results of the two measurements show that the teachers who participated in the project almost exclusively focus on realising the dialogical aspect of the learning environment, while the project managers aim for the inquiry- and practice-based aspects as well. Apparently, the schools’ vision regarding a strong career learning environment is not adopted by the teachers, despite their increased awareness of the importance of meaningful career dialogues since the start of their involvement in the project. The collective learning cycle (Lodders, 2013) is not fully run through, as the last phases of collective action and evaluation and reflection are not yet reached. The emphasis is on the distribution of information in the form of spreading the renewed vision document and conducting training and workshops on COG, and on collectively interpreting this information through dialogue, by giving each other feedback on conducting career dialogues. The project managers speak mainly about their plans regarding the implementation of the new policy on career guidance. Therefore, most of the actual implementation is not yet executed.

All project managers speak about developing and documenting the schools’ renewed vision on career orientation and guidance. Therefore, between the first and the second measurement, there is increased clarity on the schools’ vision on COG and the aims of the project. However, this vision is not shared by all teachers, as many teachers have different perspectives on the role they and their schools have to play in guiding the students’ career. It seems that most school- and team leaders have neglected to initiate and guide the development of a shared vision, which is an important aspect of the transformational leadership style as well as the collective learning process, as the teachers were not involved in the development. The vision is not constructed and shared by the collective, according to the teachers. The project managers seem to agree with the teachers, since they specifically wish for more involvement and support of the school- and team leaders.

We conclude that the confusion of the teachers between the first and second measurement regarding the clarity of the goal and form of the project, and the school-specific vision on COG is decreased. Although this vision is clearer to the teachers, it is not supported by all of them. It appears that the renewed vision on COG is developed by the project managers and school leaders, and imposed on the teachers as a starting point for their collective learning process. Since initiating and guiding the development of a shared vision is an important aspect of transformational leadership, this leadership style seems not to be experienced. Most of the teachers as well as project managers, however, wish for this aspect of transformational leadership. Considering reculturing within the schools demands a collective learning process of the teachers guided by a transformational leadership style (Fullan, 2007; Lodders, 2013; Geijsel et al., 2009; Oude Groote Beverborg et al., 2015), this absence of a shared and widely supported vision on career orientation and guidance appears to withhold the teachers and the project managers to engage in the next crucial phase of the collective learning process, collective action. Therefore, we argue that involvement of teachers in developing a vision is essential for full support. Determining the goals and direction of the learning process together is likely to be of positive influence on the outcomes. Moreover, involvement of the school- and team leaders during the other phases of the collective learning process is advisable, since their facilitation and support is essential for the reculturing of schools.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors

Aniek Draaisma started her doctoral research in September 2013 at the Welten Institute: Research Centre for Learning, Teaching and Technology of the Open University of the Netherlands.

Frans Meijers is professor in Pedagogy of Vocational and Professional Education of The Hague University of Applied Sciences.

Marinka Kuijpers professor in Learning Environment and Learning Careers in Vocational Education at the Welten Institute of the Open University.