Peer learning has already existed for a long time, as an informal as well as a formal practice between people from the same professional area. However, peer learning systems on the macro level are relatively newer concepts. Policy learning can be fostered by various types of organised activities, ranging from peer review frameworks, which often have a focus on accountability and learning, to international learning events, which are based on concepts like the ‘learning spiral’. This article reviews existing international practices of organised governmental learning on the system level, which are also linked to processes on the micro level. It thereby gives a framework to discuss two different VET peer learning activities across Europe which are organised by the European Union (EU) and the European Training Foundation (ETF).
BarbierJ.-C. (2011) Co-ordination of Social Policies at the EU Level: an ambiguous relationship between evaluation and politics, in EliadisP.FuruboJ.-E. & JacobS. (Eds) Evaluation: seeking truth or power?, pp. 111–129. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
3.
BlindenbacherR. & NashatB. (2010) The Black Box of Governmental Learning: the learning spiral – a concept to organize learning in governments. Washington, DC: World Bank.
CaseyB.H. & GoldM. (2005) Peer Review of Labour Market Policies in the European Union: what can countries really learn from one another?Journal of European Public Policy, 12, 23–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1350176042000311899
6.
CEDEFOP (European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training) (2010) A Bridge to the Future: European policy for vocational education and training 2002–2010. Luxembourg: CEDEFOP.
7.
ChakrounB. (2010) National Qualification Frameworks: from policy borrowing to policy learning, European Journal of Education, 45(2), Part I, 199–216.
8.
Di BattistaG.PalombaL. & VerganiA. (2009) Evaluating the Quality of Italian Local Vocational Training Systems, Evaluation, 15(2), 185–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1356389008101966
ENQA-VET (2009b) Learning Lessons from ENQA-VET's Peer Learning Activities.
11.
European Commission (EC) (2008) Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Establishment of a European Quality Assurance Reference Framework for Vocational Education and Training, SEC (2008) 440, SEC (2008), 441, Brussels.
12.
European Training Foundation (ETF) (2001) Guidelines for Western Balkan VET Reform Policy Reviews. Turin: ETF.
13.
FitzJ. (2003) The Politics of Accountability: a perspective from England and Wales, Journal of Education, 78(4), 230–241.
14.
GrimmS.NawrathK.RothR.TriebelS. & UtzB. (2009) The African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) as a Tool to Improve Governance?Bonn: Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE).
15.
GrootingsP.NielsenS.NikolovskaM. & VosA. (2006) Peer Review and Peer Learning: incompatible or complementary approaches to facilitate policy learning?, in ETF Yearbook 2006: skills development for poverty reduction. Turin: European Training Foundation (ETF).
HerbertR. & GruzdS. (2008) The African Peer Review Mechanism: lessons from the pioneers. Johannesburg: South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA).
18.
JordaanE. (2007) Grist for the Sceptics Mill: Rwanda and the African peer review mechanisms, Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 25(3), 331–353. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02589000701662392
19.
KyriakidesL. & CampbellR.J. (2004) School Self-Evaluation and School Improvement: a critique of values and procedures, Studies in Educational Evaluation, 30(1), 23–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-491X(04)90002-8
MassonJ.-R. (2007) The Contribution of European Vocational Training Policy to Reforms in the Partner Countries of the EU, European Journal of Vocational Training, 41, 43–63.
23.
NedergaardP. (2006) Which Countries Learn from Which? A Comparative Analysis of the Direction of Mutual Learning Processes within the Open Method of Coordination Committees of the European Union and Among the Nordic Countries, Cooperation and Conflict, 41(4), 422–442. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0010836706069870
24.
New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) (2003) Declaration on Democracy, Political, Economic and Corporate Governance. http://www.aprm-international.org/.
25.
NikolovskaM. & VosA. (2008) ETF Peer Learning: from policy learning to policy change in partner countries, in ETF Yearbook 2008: policy learning in practice, pp. 39–51. Turin: European Training Foundation (ETF).
RistR.C. & StameN. (2006) From Studies to Streams: managing evaluative systems, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
28.
SabatierP.A. & Jenkins-SmithH.C. (1999) The Advocacy Coalition Framework, an assessment, in SabatierP.A. (Ed.) Theories of the Policy Process, pp. 117–166. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
29.
ScharpfF.W. (2002), The European Social Model: coping with the challenges of diversity, Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(4), 645–670. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-5965.00392
30.
SpeerS. (2010) Peer Evaluation and Its Blurred Boundaries: results from a meta-evaluation in initial vocational education and training, Evaluation, 16(4), 413–430. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1356389010382265
31.
SpeerS. (2011a) Peer Evaluation – the powerful peer? In EliadisP.FuruboJ.-E., & JacobS. (Eds) Evaluation: seeking truth or power?, pp. 149–171. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
32.
SpeerS. (2011b, forthcoming) Sectoral Evaluation Cultures: a comparison of labour market and education policy in Germany, in BarbierJ.-C. & HawkinsP. (Eds) Evaluation Cultures. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
33.
SultanaR.G. (2008) The Promises and Pitfalls of Peer Learning, in ETF Yearbook 2008: policy learning in practice, pp. 95–99. Turin: European Training Foundation (ETF).
