The actual structures in the German Higher Education System reflect the political intentions of lifelong learning insufficiently. Universities usually plan and organise their programmes for "traditional" students, who enter the university directly after high school to start a full-time Bachelor-Programme and to go ahead with a full-time Master-Programme. Those "traditional" students enter the job market only after graduation. The questions now are, if the number of "non-traditional" students is indeed bigger than estimated, and if German universities therefore have to adjust their programmes to the needs of adult learners, who enter the job market before or during the course of study. Following we explain the actual political discussions regarding this issue, before we describe how other countries deal with adults considered as "non-traditional" learners (e.g. employed students). The article ends with recommendations how to re-organise Bachelor- and Master-Programmes to consider the needs of those students and to better integrate the academic and the vocational (continuing) education system.

European Journal of EducationVolume 44, Issue 3 p. 351-368 Towards Permeability between Vocational and Academic Education. Experiences and Analyses from Current Initiatives in Germany ERNST A. HARTMANN, ERNST A. HARTMANN Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg VDI/VDE-IT, GermanySearch for more papers by this authorMICHAELA KNUST, MICHAELA KNUST Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, Center for Lifelong Learning (C3L), GermanySearch for more papers by this authorCLAUDIA LOROFF, CLAUDIA LOROFF VDI/VDE-IT, GermanySearch for more papers by this authorIDA STAMM-RIEMER, IDA STAMM-RIEMER HIS, GermanySearch for more papers by this author ERNST A. HARTMANN, ERNST A. HARTMANN Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg VDI/VDE-IT, GermanySearch for more papers by this authorMICHAELA KNUST, MICHAELA KNUST Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, Center for Lifelong Learning (C3L), GermanySearch for more papers by this authorCLAUDIA LOROFF, CLAUDIA LOROFF VDI/VDE-IT, GermanySearch for more papers by this authorIDA STAMM-RIEMER, IDA STAMM-RIEMER HIS, GermanySearch for more papers by this author First published: 27 August 2009 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-3435.2009.01390.xCitations: 10Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume44, Issue3Special Issue: Work‐based Learning in Higher EducationSeptember 2009Pages 351-368 RelatedInformation

This chapter summarises the findings of the respective country studies on continuing higher education. On the system level, the chapter presents an overview about the education and higher education policy frameworks. It is discussed here how accessible higher education institutions are in the age of lifelong learning. On the institutional level, information about organisation, management and regulation of continuing higher education is given. In addition to that, the question of central or decentral organisation is focussed and information about special aspects, such as quality assurance, marketing or funding are mentioned. Finally, the questions of profile development and institutional lifelong learning policy are addressed. On the programme level, finding about course structures, new types of learning and specific partnership agreements with the business community are included.

In 2006, an international comparison study investigated the organization and management of university continuing education (UCE). The Finnish continuing education system proved to be especially advanced in this study. On the other hand, it became clear that Germany was still lagging behind in continuing education. In this article, German and Finnish universities are compared with respect to organizational forms and management structures in order to derive potentials for UCE and to identify decisive factors of success.

Während die Bedeutung des Lifelong Learning international stark wächst und sich in veränderten und erheblich erweiterten Angebotsstrukturen ausdrückt, können die deutschen Einrichtungen der wissenschaftlichen Weiterbildung dies bislang nicht für eine Stärkung ihrer innerhochschulischen Position nutzen. Eine internationale Vergleichsstudie zeigt, dass Organisationsformen, Verantwortlichkeiten oder Bandbreite der bearbeiteten Geschäftsfelder in den Vergleichsländern eine bedeutsamere Position sowohl innerhalb der Hochschulen als auch außerhalb, durch eine stärkere Marktpräsenz, ermöglichen. Dieser Beitrag bietet eine Sicht über „den eigenen Tellerrand“ und zeigt sowohl wie die wissenschaftliche Weiterbildung in den Vergleichsländern positioniert ist als auch welche Implikationen sich hieraus für Deutschland ergeben.

An international comparison study investigated the organisation and management of continuing higher education (CHE) in Germany, Finland, France, the United Kingdom, Austria and the United States of America. CHE is compared on the system level (boundaries between traditional study programmes and CHE, linking of CHE and vocational training, accessibility openness of the HE system, and recognition of prior learning), the institutional level (type of organisation, cooperation between centralised and decentralised units, and implementation of lifelong learning), as well as on the programme level (use of ECTS-credit points, duration of courses, e-learning, and corporate programmes) in order to derive potentials for CHE and to identify decisive factors of success. The main results are reported in this article.