Mobilising for change in vocational education and training in Sweden – a case study of the ‘Technical College’ scheme

Abstract

In this article, we analyse a recent industry-driven initiative in Sweden for the organisation and operation of Vocational Education and Training. In the context of a statist and schoolbased system for VET, this is an initiative which seems to be an example of an anomaly in the present system. The initiative is called the Technical College scheme and is a certification scheme for upper secondary school education in technology. The aim of this article is to describe and explain the establishment of the Technical College scheme in Sweden from a historical institutionalist approach. Based on this approach, the case is analysed as a process of incremental institutional change, with a focus on initiatives and strategies by different stakeholders driving the invention and implementation of the scheme, the importance of the power balances between central interests, and how the process has been shaped by institutional conditions. Our study shows how previously marginalised actors in a VET system can mobilise for change without radically changing the rules of the game. The process that we characterise can be explained by changes in the power balances between key actors, but also by changed institutional conditions that have provided windows of opportunity for new initiatives.

Employers placing orders and students as commodities: Swedish post-secondary vocational education and training policy

“…Both unions and employers' organisations take part. This is also the case in the employer-driven initiative of parallel certification regarding initial technical VET, where the union is a significant stakeholder in the scheme (Persson and Hermelin 2018). In HVE, however, the unions have no official position.…”

“…The policy on HVE and the arrangement of the system have thus created relations of power and control that are new to the Swedish context. The limited involvement, by national comparison, of the state, the strong employer influence and marketised provision are clearly divergent from the previously strong Swedish paradigm of nationally controlled VET, the legacy of which still has a strong influence on upper secondary education (Persson and Hermelin 2018;Virolainen and Thunqvist 2017). Policy and the system of HVE have instead, to a great extent, positioned power and control over the device and its recontexualising principlesthe pedagogic discoursewith the locally involved employers (Bernstein 1990(Bernstein , 2000.…”

“…Interesting parallels with the organisation of HVE may be seen in an industrydriven initiative regarding technical VET in Swedish upper secondary education. This initiative is said to have been possible because working life had been given a more influential role in initial VET and national control of upper secondary education had been loosened due to decentralisation and marketisation (Persson and Hermelin 2018). The initiative is a certification scheme to secure manual skills in technology-based industries which runs parallel to the national regulations.…”

Decentralised cooperation between industries and local governments in a statist skill-formation system: an analysis of industrial schools in Sweden

“…The scholarly debate on cooperation within VET has primarily focussed on the national level, however, and much less on local and regional levels. Several researchers have argued that there is a need for research that improves our understanding of the role of cooperation within VET at the local and regional levels (Culpepper 2003;Gessler 2017;Persson and Hermelin 2018). In a recent article by Emmenegger et al, the authors argue that too little attention has been paid to a systematic comparative analysis of 'the causes, patterns and outcomes' of cooperation at the decentralised level (Emmenegger, Graf, and Trampusch 2019, 22).…”

“…However, during the last few decades, a number of socalled industrial schools have been established by major Swedish industrial companies, often in collaboration with, and co-owned by, local governments. These initiatives were made possible through decentralisation and marketisation reforms of the school system in Sweden (Karlsson, Lundh Nilsson, and Nilsson 2015;Persson and Hermelin 2018). In many ways, these schools represent a deviation from the overall Swedish VET regime, since the industrial firms involved in them have a stronger commitment than is generally the case for industrial partners in the Swedish VET model.…”