mail print
	Peer Reviews Thematic Review Seminars Follow-up activities Synthesis Reports European Employment Observatory European Employment Strategy		Open Method of Coordination Peer Review The peer review of the Open Method of Coordination in the United Kingdom was organised in Sheffield. This review consisted of two parallel coordination sessions on two different methods featuring in the context of lifelong learning, namely the University for Industry (abbr. UfI) and Individual Learning Accounts (abbr. ILAs). The ILAs aim to enable individuals to participate (more frequently) in training by encouraging them to open special saving accounts to pay for their own learning. The UfI extends beyond individuals and is aimed at developing an adequate and transparent system to deliver an open method of coordination peer review. The British approach is promising for Germany. Elements of the open method of coordination  that may form part of the German approach are the network-based orientation, the use of new communication technologies and the small-scale pilot implementation which allows for remedial action before the programme is implemented on a large scale. The co-financing of the ILAs is also thought to be relevant to the German situation. The Dutch representative and expert both share the view that the British UfI will not be exactly imitated in the Netherlands because the institutional differences are too great. The Netherlands pursues a decentralised coordination approach to stimulate lifelong learning, whereas in the United Kingdom the measures are implemented mainly centrally. Despite these differences, the insights offered by the approach of their British colleagues have prompted the Dutch participants to think about the methodological aspects of encourage people to undertake lifelong learning methods. France is currently preparing the introduction of open methods of coordination at local level and they show similarities with the British programme. Therefore, several concepts of open methods of coordination might be transferred to France. One example is the open and flexible nature of the approach, which is further enhanced by the location of the UfI Learning Centres in everyday peer reviews. The importance of social dialogue in France hinders the direct and complete coordination of the good practice. Therefore, this is not considered to be possible. Like his Dutch colleague, the Danish peer review took the view that it was not possible to copy or transfer complete methods to Denmark. This also holds for the British coordination approach. This approach needs first of all to be adapted to the Danish tradition of social dialogue. The need to develop structures in which the individual can design his or her training was still an interesting concept underlying the peer review. The British activities to stimulate open methods of coordination tie in well with Italy's current effort to reform its educational infrastructure. The Italian educational system is structurally fragmented as several ministries are responsible for different parts of this system. The UfI concept is especially open in Italy as a UfI-like organisation can encourage and facilitate the coordination and cooperation of the different institutions involved education. But once again, the representative of a peer country draws attention to the need to involve social partners in the encouragement of lifelong learning. In Ireland, the current skill shortage on the labour force has triggered the debate on the need for lifelong learning. Owing to the poorly developed adult education infrastructure, the opportunities for adults with poor qualifications to return to learning are limited. Therefore, the British peer reviews are of importance to Ireland, although a lot of elements of the British programme still have to prove their methods. The Irish peer reviews were especially impressed by the diversity of the instruments used in the United Kingdom to stimulate lifelong peer review. The motivational elements of the coordination programme could also be introduced in Ireland.
			© European Communities, 1995-2005 Reproduction is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged, save where otherwise stated. Where prior permission must be obtained for the reproduction or use of textual and multimedia information (sound, images, software, etc.), such permission shall cancel the above-mentioned general permission and shall clearly indicate any restrictions on use. This page was last updated: Monday, May 21, 2007 at 3:18:58 PM :: Webmaster FOX medialab & design