In the previous posts in our series on monitoring and evaluating work-based learning, we discussed the analysis of the input, process, output and outcome dimensions of WBL at the country level. This final contribution shifts the focus towards international comparisons.
Owing to the diversity of national VET systems, work-based learning has not played a major role in international comparative studies on education and training. In recent years, however, political initiatives to strengthen work-based learning have increased interest in transnational comparisons and benchmarking. For instance, the Osnabrück Declaration, signed in late November 2020, calls for the exchange of information and peer-learning activities on innovative policy reforms in VET, which implies the need for comparison across country plans and measures, in order to identify good practices. In a similar vein, the Council Recommendation on VET stipulates, as a target, that, by 2025, 60% of recent VET graduates should benefit from exposure to work-based learning during their training, setting a benchmark against which national VET systems and policies may be comparatively assessed, in principle.
On another front, the OECD, building on previous work undertaken in collaboration with the European Union and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), has identified four key areas of VET policy for which appropriate indicators and data are available at a transnational scale:
- structure of national VET systems;
- participation and profile of VET students;
- learning venues;
- resources dedicated to VET.
The topic of national VET structures can be covered by basic features, such as types of programmes, qualifications and institutions involved in VET. Another general feature that would fit into this category is the prevalence of work-based learning within the education system. For example, a recent Cedefop report used data from the 2016 EU Labour Force Survey to compare the exposure of learners to work-based learning within formal education in different countries. According to the report, 31% of graduates from medium-level vocational education in the EU-27 did not have any work experience during their studies, 9% worked outside the curriculum, 30% spent time as a trainee; and 31% spent time as an apprentice. In 18 countries, more than 50% of graduates from medium-level vocational education participated in either traineeships or apprenticeships.
The participation of VET students can be measured and compared in terms of their enrolment rates. For instance, data from the OECD’s ‘Education at a glance’ series allows for comparing the percentage of upper secondary level students in different branches of education, namely general education, full-time vocational schools and work-based learning. In the 2018 report, enrolment rates for WBL in selected countries vary between 58% (Switzerland) and 6% (Czech Republic).
Another important indicator that provides evidence of the relevance of VET and work-based learning is the training ratio, which is calculated as the share of individuals with apprenticeship contracts (according to national legislation), regardless of the level of education (upper secondary or higher), in the total number of employed people in the respective country. Adopting a generic definition of the employee status, e.g. the one provided by the International Labour Organization, helps to overcome the difficulties associated with the diversity of national labour regulations. It is interesting to note that the proportion of apprentices or in-company trainees as a percentage of the workforce may lead to a slightly different picture of the status and relevance of work-based learning. This is a reminder that WBL should not only be regarded through the perspective of the educational but also as part of the employment system.
From a scientific point of view, the variety of vocational education and training provision across countries is a challenge. However, it also offers a valuable opportunity: comparative research could be an effective method for investigating which features of VET systems and programmes have a positive effect on the labour market outcomes for and socio-economic conditions of the participants.
References:
Bundesinstitut für Berufsbildung (BIBB), Datenreport zum Berufsbildungsbericht 2019, Bonn, 2019.
Bundesinstitut für Berufsbildung (BIBB), Datenreport zum Berufsbildungsbericht 2020, Bonn, 2020.
Cedefop, The role of work-based learning in VET and tertiary education: evidence from the 2016 EU labour force survey, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2021.
Kis, V., ‘Improving evidence on VET: Comparative data and indicators’, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No 250, OECD, Paris, 2020: https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/d43dbf09–en
Osnabrück Declaration on vocational education and training as an enabler of recovery and just transitions to digital and green economies, endorsed on 30 November 2020: https://www.bmbf.de/files/Osnabrueck–Declaration.pdf
Please log in or sign up to comment.