Learning and teaching with Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems – A report on self-reflected typical student mistakes and problem-solving approaches by student teachers

Introduction and theoretical framework Enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems are standard in professional workplaces. ERP systems store data in a central database and map business processes holistically across different application levels. The systems access operational information on a horizontal (functional) level for operational work steps in real-time and condense this information on a vertical (informational) level to various aggregation levels (Wigand et al., 2003). In vocational education and training (VET), the use of ERP systems at the workplace is often limited to routine activities (Jasperson et al., 2005), such as retrieving information, since improper use would severely disrupt operational processes. Against this background, learning opportunities are needed, e.g., in school settings. In the German dual vocational training system, which combines in-company training with learning in the vocational school, there is a positive experience with intensive work with ERP systems at the vocational school learning site. This is not only about learning routines but also about a look “behind the scenes” to promote a deep understanding of the business processes mapped in the ERP system. Here, errors are possible (and a central component of learning processes (Metcalfe, 2017)), and processes can be decelerated in a comprehensible way. Method To promote the use of ERP systems in vocational schools, a comprehensive seminar on the use and didactic possibilities of ERP systems was integrated into teacher training on university level (n = 18 further teachers at vocational schools). The participants worked on three learning modules in an ERP system. They reflected their own typical student errors in standardized reflection diaries (including brief problem descriptions, problem ratings (1 to 4), types of problem-solving approaches, brief solving description, and a rating (1 to 4) of success). A total of 52 diaries, including 129 student errors, could be evaluated. The typical student errors were categorized into one of the following problem types: Task unclear, Procedure unclear (e.g., inputs incorrect), Technical in nature (e.g., system error), or Other. Approaches to problem-solving were grouped into one or more of the following categories: Reasoning/Directed Approach (systematic), Experimentation (more unsystematic), Interviewing Others, Observing Others, Search, and Other. As an additional evaluation measure, we collected data using the TPACK questionnaire (Koehler & Mishra, 2009) at the beginning and end of the seminar. Findings and discussion First results show that the most frequent problems are related to unclear procedures, followed by problems of a more technical nature and other problems. In contrast, the tasks are seldom unclear (see Table 1). For the most common types of problems, procedural unclarity, a solution is often found by systematically working through the task steps or observing others. Technical problems are more likely to be solved through more unsystematically Experimentation. The TPACK scales show slight improvements concerning the TPCK subscale in the first analysis (see Figure 1). Data collection has been recently completed, but data analysis is ongoing and will be evaluated for presentation. Results so far indicate that different problem types follow different solution patterns and that student teachers feel more prepared for technology in classrooms