In this article, we argue that every typology should be constructed in a systematic, transparent process. Moreover, to validate a typology's explanatory value, a typological approach must rest on a strong theoretical foundation. We both propose such an approach and apply it to construct three ideal types of vocational education and training (VET) programs. We build on Luhmann's theory of social systems, which helps elucidate the significance of the linkage between actors from the education and employment systems in VET. The first ideal type, with a maximal linkage, entails equal power-sharing between actors from the two systems. We expect such a VET program to have the most favorable youth labor market outcome. In contrast, the other two ideal types, in which only one system has all of the power, result in either undesirable outcomes, such as unemployment or skill mismatch, or missing access to further education.
Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte.
Terms of use:
Documents in
Measuring the Social Status of Education Programmes: Applying a New Measurement to Dual Vocational Education and
Training in SwitzerlandThis paper proposes a new approach to measuring changes in the social status of education programmes, a type of social status that the literature has greatly neglected so far. We focus on the dual Vocational Education and Training (dual VET) system in Switzerland, which has recently received substantial attention across Europe. We argue that, holding everything else constant, a change in the relative ability of students in an education programme, in relation to the cohort, reflects a change in the social status of that programme. Using PISA scores as a proxy for cognitive ability, we apply this approach to test whether growing knowledge of the education system increases the social status of dual VET in Switzerland. Our results, which focus on immigrant students, confirm that the social status of dual VET increases with these students length of stay in Switzerland, thus reflecting their learning process about the Swiss education system.
To combat negative trends in the youth labour market, policymakers around the world support vocational education and training (VET) programmes. This paper investigates how enrolment rates in upper‐secondary education programmes – general education, school‐based VET and dual VET – affect ten youth labour market indicators on integration and job quality. We run first‐difference generalized method of moments regressions on panel data of 36 countries for 2004 through 2014. We complement the existing literature by dealing with unobserved heterogeneity across time and reverse causality and by analysing non‐linear effects that might arise due to general equilibrium effects. Our findings show that school‐based VET and dual VET have different effects: school‐based VET's effect on the labour market depends on the outcome indicator and country, whereas dual VET overall improves both labour market integration and job quality. Depending on the labour market indicator, we find evidence for both linear and non‐linear effects. In educational reforms, policymakers should therefore consider the non‐linear and heterogeneous effects of VET.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.