Page 3 - euroguidance-insight-2017-autumn

3

These different national models could be broadly The change from LdV I to LdV II was of particu-

grouped into 4 groups: lar interest in terms of the development of the net-
work. In the year prior to the change a number of
• A single centre approach with one unit deliv- centres felt there was a need to establish the need
ering the Euroguidance function for the whole for the Euroguidance network in a more concrete
country; fashion, and to promote the development of the
network and its activities. To enable this a num-
• The multi centre approach with several centres ber of centres met in Madrid and developed the
operating in a country. These were often tasked “Euroguidance Charter”, a document defining the
with co-operating with specific other member basis for the centres and their remit of operation.
states and co-operating nationally. For example The concept of working groups, responsible for dif-
in Germany, the centre in Bremen was tasked ferent areas of activity and for the overall direction
with liaising with the UK and Ireland;
of development also came from this meeting. The
• The labour versus education split. In some charter and working group structure was proposed
member states two centres were set up, one to the Commission at the next full network meeting
operating under the Ministry of Labour and and, with some modification, was adopted. This
concerned with vocational guidance and one internal structure has continued ever since.
operating under the Ministry of Education and
concerned with educational guidance; On a personal note I would like to express my
gratitude to the network for 24 years of wonder-
• Finally there was a mixed approach with two ful co-operation. My experience has always been
networks, operating under the two Ministries of working with passionate, committed and highly
and each consisting of several centres, as for professional colleagues whom I miss dearly.
example was originally the case in France.

From these beginnings the network has grown and
changed over the years. The growth has come,
naturally, from the subsequent enlargements of
the European Union, with the number of Member
States climbing from 12 in 1992 to 28 currently.
Further growth came from the inclusion of EEA
Member States plus, at various points, the pre-
accession countries and the special relationship
with Switzerland.

Other developments have come from the changes to
the sponsoring programme, and also from develop-
ments initiated within the network itself. In terms of
the sponsoring programme the changes have been:

• 1992 – 1994 the Petra programme
• 1995 – 1999 Leonardo da Vinci I
• 2000 – 2006 Leonardo da Vinci II
• 2007 – 2013 Lifelong Learning Programme
• 2014 – 2020 Erasmus +
Mick Carey, former coordinator of Euroguidance UK