This question was asked of all those test persons (TP 03, 06, 07, 08, 10, 11, 12, 16) who answered in question 3 that they had participated in at least one further vocational training course in 2014. All eight test persons can assign themselves to one of the answer categories. With the exception of the category "self-employed", all answer options are mentioned at least once. Only one test person (TP 08) judges the answering of the question as "rather difficult", as she is unsure whether she should assign herself to category 1 (employed) or category 4 (in-company training):
"I have to decide between 1 or 4. Well, I have been paid regularly, but the loss I made in the end due to the school days I have compensated in such a way that I have committed myself not to quit afterwards in such and such a long time. I say company training. [...] I thought to myself that I was employed because I received my regular salary all the time. But then I thought to myself that [the specialist nurse training] was organized in a company and not run by an outside contractor. That's why I chose [answer] 4, because it was both organized and held at the company.” Test person 08 finally opts for the answer category "In in-company training". However, this assignment is not correct because the test person has acquired a further vocational qualification during her employment, i.e. while working part-time, which she should have indicated in question 2 for the highest vocational qualification.
The four test persons (TP 03, 06, 07, 11) who state that they were in employment at the time of the training explain the choice of their answer as follows
- “I was working as a teacher at the time." (TP 06)
- "It was an in-company training course. So I enjoyed the training while working, during working hours." (TP 11)
Test person 12, who states that she was "registered unemployed" at the time of the training, also places herself correctly. Test persons 10 and 16 indicate that they were "not employed" during the further training. Whereas test person 10 was a student at that time and thus also classifies herself correctly, test person 16 states that she was "not employed", although according to her own information she was registered as unemployed at the time of the further training. Test person 16 explains this as follows:
"I was looking for a job. I wrote applications. [...] Because the employment office is not so important to me. I feel that not being employed is more important." Consequently, test person 16 (falsely) uses the answer category "not employed" as an alternative to "registered unemployed".
Furthermore, the test persons were asked what they understand by the category "not employed". The following table shows examples of who, in the view of the test persons, can be counted as "not employed":
| Answer |
Number of mentions |
| Unemployed/Employment seekers [Arbeitslose/-suchende] |
7 (TP 03, 06, 07, 08, 10, 11, 16) |
| Pensioner [Rentner] |
4 (TP 10, 11, 12, 16) |
| Housewives/Housemen [Hausfrauen, Hausmänner] |
3 (TP 07, 10, 16) |
| Pupils/Students [Schüler/Studenten] |
3 (TP 07, 08, 16) |
| Sick people/nursing cases [Kranke Menschen/Pflegefälle] |
3 (TP 11, 12, 16) |
| Welfare recipients [Sozialhilfeempfänger] |
2 (TP 10, 16) |
| Fathers/mothers on parental leave [Väter/Mütter in Elternzeit] |
1 (TP 03) |
When asked whether it would have helped them in their classification if examples such as "housewife, pensioner, school education" had been given for the category "not employed" or whether this was not necessary at this point, three test persons (TP 03, 06, 11) stated "Yes, that would have helped me" and five test persons (TP 07, 08, 10, 12, 16) "No, that was not necessary here". Obviously, however, six of the eight persons surveyed also think of unemployed persons or job seekers who should partly classify themselves in category 3 "Registered unemployed" and three test persons think of pupils and students who should partly classify themselves in category 4 "In in-company training". Consequently, there is an overlap between the category "Not in employment" and other response options, so that it is not clearly defined.
