Women’s participation in education and training in New Zealand: is the ‘learn while you earn’ option accessible to all?

Abstract

Strong education and training systems are viewed as a route to increased labour market participation for groups who have traditionally been excluded from, or marginalised in, the labour market. Engagement in the labour force for such groups contributes to a better quality of life for the individual and has the added benefit of helping to address the demographic imperative to maximise the pool of available labour in the face of a shrinking workforce. However, while this emphasis on an increased role for the state in education and training is encouraging, commentators such as Stalker (2000) have questioned the ability of Third Way discourse to meet the unique needs of women, given the absence of explicit feminist dialogue in wider discussions on associated policy and practice. Informed by this critique, this article aims to evaluate changes in education and training policy and practice in New Zealand since 1999, in terms of the extent to which it does-or does not-enhance opportunities for women's participation in education and training. In doing so, the article will firstly examine how changes to the nature of work lead to the need for greater inclusion of marginalized groups. Second, the changes to education and training policy and practice to facilitate greater inclusion will be outlined. Third, a small case study will be provided that demonstrates how these changes and their implications for women have been recognized by a provider of traditional trades-based education and training.

Education through Production and its Potential Value for Young People De-motivated with Their Schooling

“…In both the case of Tamu and the production school, it is not a matter of “throwing” the pupil directly into on-going production, but for the adults and teachers to guide and to co-participate in learning processes anchored around production. In a more conventional workplace, productivity pressures may limit the amount of training; there may be inadequate supervision, unsafe work practices and difficulties in actually finding jobs (Taylor, 2006, Piercy, Murray & Abernethy 2006). In the case of Tamu and the production schools, learning is organised in a safer way, but production remains the focus of the enterprise.…”

“…It is becoming increasingly important to consider learning arrangements for youth “at risk” because access to training and education is acknowledged as a key to ensuring social inclusion and increased labour market participation. This is particularly relevant for groups that have traditionally been excluded from, or marginalised in the labour market (Piercy, Murray & Abernethy, 2006). In a recent German study concerned with the relatively high rate of dropouts in further education in Germany, the following is stated as background for that study: “Education is the single most important determinant of occupational success in industrialized societies” (Glaesser, 2006, p. 84).…”

“…It is becoming increasingly important to consider learning arrangements for youth “at risk” because access to training and education is acknowledged as a key to ensuring social inclusion and increased labour market participation. This is particularly relevant for groups that have traditionally been excluded from, or marginalised in the labour market (Piercy, Murray & Abernethy, 2006). Based on a broader project conducted in Northern Jutland, Denmark, for “Youth at Risk”, the case-stories of three young people (Ivan, Daniella and Lisa) are presented, evaluated and discussed.…”