The Shifting Relationship between Vocational and Higher Education in France and Germany: towards convergence?

Abstract

In Europe, the Bologna and Copenhagen Processes in higher education (HE) and vocational education and training (VET) are on the agenda, aiming to create a European educational area. Acknowledging important differences between countries, we compare the evolving relationship between HE and VET. We ask whether and how these two distinct organisational fields in France and Germany have changed in recent decades. Comparing institutional shifts, the article analyses whether long‐standing differences in postsecondary education and training systems and the education/economy nexus in these two countries have remained stable. We argue that these countries’ skill formation systems have begun to converge, departing from their original institutionalisation paths. Thus, while the traditional typologies that contrast France and Germany have served as useful heuristic devices, they require revision to adequately represent incremental institutional change in these skill formation systems resulting from endogenous reforms and exogenous pressures due to Europeanisation.

Going Up-Skill: Exploring the Transformation of the German Skill Formation System

“…Next to the increased provision of STEM skills via the Higher Education Pact, large business contributed directly to the process by offering since the 2000s an everincreasing number of places in dual study programmesby and large housed at universities of applied sciences. The emergence of dual study programmes has been a defining feature of the higher education landscape over the last decade in particular (Powell et al 2012, Powell and Solga 2010, Graf 2013, 2017. According to the 3 MINT is the German acronym for STEM.…”

Higher vocational education and social mobility: educational participation in Australia and England

“…Mission and status differences between higher vocational education and university-based higher education, would appear to be important areas of consideration in exploring the relationship between widening access and social mobility, not only between Anglophone and German speaking countries, but also within Anglophone countries (Graf 2013;Powell, Graf, Bernhard, Coutrot and Kieffer, 2012;Wheelahan 2009). Furthermore, the literature on (Davies, Williams and Webb 1997;Vickers and Bekhradnia 2007).…”

“…The literature that has conceptualised system differences between liberalmarket and mixed regulation ideal types has argued that vocational education and training (VET) in Australia has developed a distinctive version of the liberal-market Anglophone model due to the greater role played by employers in Australia, compared to the UK, and partly shaped by the regulations of occupational sectors and the activities of some states and territories (Graf 2013;Knight and Mlotkowski 2009;Powell et al 2012). The introduction of deregulation of student fees and market competition for VET funding between private and public providers has reduced the role of the public providers of VET, increased the role of the private sector, particularly as large employers become private training organisations and consequently increased the appetite of TAFEs to seek out new markets, such as higher vocational education Knight and Mlotkowski 2009).…”

Managing the Dynamics of the Bologna Reforms: How Institutional Actors Re-Construct the Policy Framework

“…Broadly speaking, the analysis of policy focuses on the political, national and institutional take up of Bologna. The role of Bologna in policy (see for instance, Amaral & Magalhaes 2004;Amaral, Neave, Musselin, & Maassen, 2009;Amaral & Veiga, 2012;Balzer & Martens 2004;Capano & Piattoni, 2011;Chou & Gornitzka, 2014: Gornitzka, 2006Hoareau, 2011, Huisman & Van Der Wende, 2004b, Keeling, 2006Neave & Maassen, 2007;Papatsiba, 2006;Ravinet, 2008;Veiga & Amaral, 2006, 2009a, 2012aVeiga, Magalhães, & Amaral, 2015;Voegtle, Knill, & Dobbins, 2011;Wit & Verhoeven, 2001) and very particularly both its implications and its impact at system level have been widely studied, as a sub set of policy implementation (see for instance, Alesi, Burger, Kehm, & Teichler, 2005;Diaz, Santaolalla, & Gonzalez 2010;Guth 2006;Heinze & Knill 2008;Helgøy & Homme, 2013;Kehm, Huisman, & Stensaker, 2009;Kehm & Teichler, 2006;Magalhães, 2010;Moscati, 2009;Musselin, 2009;Powell, Graf, Bernhard, Coutrot, & Kieffer, 2012;Rudder 2010;Sin, 2012;Tomusk, 2006;Vällima, Hoffman, & Huusko, 2006;, 2009bVeiga, Amaral, & Mendes, 2008;Witte, 2006…”