school or other kind of technical institution (e.g. kind of industrial sector, guilds or ..... companies use the protected status of the apprentices to use them as cheap ...
Governance of Vocational Education and Training (VET) Dr. Ludger Deitmer, University of Bremen, Institute Technology and Education, deitmer@uni-‐bremen.de 1. Abstract 2. Introduction 3. Three VET Governance Models 4. Analysis of VET governance models within wider context 5. Strength & Weaknesses of apprentice VET 6. The governance evaluation tool: guiding principles, evaluation criteria and evaluation process 7. Exemplary results from previous governance workshops 8. Outlook on the current problems within Indian Apprenticeship and the need for Governance 9. Conclusions 10. References 1. Abstract The article discusses the importance of governance models for the steering and coordination of different vocational education and training systems. Three kind of ideal typed VET systems (state, market and mixed) are analysed by six aspects in order to characterize particular strength’s and weaknesses. There is a set of evaluation criteria for this governance approach designed and reflected in stakeholder evaluation workshops. Finally the further development of the Indian apprenticeship system is discussed. In the conclusion I will summarize some key statements based on the INAP commission suggestion towards the architecture of an Innovative Apprenticeship. 2. Introduction There is a renewed interest into dual structured vocational education and training to be noted (cf. Rauner, Smith 2010; INAP 2012; Deitmer et al. 2013). Prominent recent example as the one in Malaysia in implementing a new dual training system, NDTS (Rashidi 2014) give rise to further discussions. Several other countries are newly adopting – or aiming to do so – apprenticeship approaches that build on the ‘dual principles’: as a combination of workplace learning in an enterprise with corresponding classroom teaching in an vocational school or other kind of technical institution (e.g. kind of industrial sector, guilds or chambers based training centre). But to transfer VET system or even elements of it into other industrial cultures is a very complex and difficult task because this touches industrial conditions, traditions and attitudes, which will not change quickly. This touches therefore not only economic but also social and issues. Like for example the different motives of stakeholders; e.g. company owners and managers, official and unofficial trainers, vocational teachers, pubic authority officials and sometimes also the social partners such as employee association and workers unions. It is worth to discuss the question of the evaluation of Governance structures of VET; because without an sustainable Governance strategy the implementation of new training arrangement may fail while some stakeholders are not convinced or many other factors
1
take considerable influence (e.g. bad image of the vocational occupation; missing technical learning infrastructure, missing training material, missing knowledge and skills at trainer and/or teachers, unattractive allowances). A governance strategy could be called sustainable if different stakeholder are willing to perform in a complementary way and are willing to support each other. Own action is coordinated with the action of others. In other words the companies are competitors on the market for goods and services but cooperate for example on the personal development level. Contradictory expectations of e.g. company trainers, vocational teachers could hinder the development of a collective understanding of vocational learning processes. How can these differences be better integrated? If to perform a more integrative governance strategy it needs to find out what could be the key criteria for this: Where is consent or dissent on these governance criteria?. If such a collective or more balanced strategy is formed it should allow better decisions and help to form an integrative training agenda; issues for changing insufficient practise’s and heading towards better training practise. The following presented approach might be understood as a evaluation tools to find out the obstacles and hindrances in order to overcome these as early as possible to develop and collective strategy under key stakeholders. 3. Three VET Governance Models In vocational education and training three ideal types of regulation and governance are usually distinguished on the dominant either from the state, the market or professional groups initiatives. The prevalent typology in policy research distinguishes three models of governance, which can be termed market-‐driven, state-‐controlled and occupation-‐driven or corporatist VET governance (see Greinert 1998, 19–22; Clematide et al. 2005, 3–4). In the following the three models are explained in terms of their regulative momentum and their rational of agency (Rauner et.al. 2010). The market-‐driven model of VET governance is characterised by the immediate control of vocational qualification by the employment system and the demand on the labour market. Vocational qualification is oriented towards the requirements of employers and takes place on the job and in a private sector of training providers offering job-‐related learning modules. The responsibility for the training process rests with the learners, who are expected to acquire the qualifications required by employers on their own. Typical examples of this model are the United States and Japan, where the relative absence of a regulated VET system is associated with a large number of students attending upper secondary schools and higher education. In this system the access to VET is controlled by employers as “customers”, whose needs and demands determine the contents of training so that the transfer of qualifications from one company to another is difficult (cf. Greinert 1998, 20–21). On the one hand this system is regarded as quite flexible and adapted to the needs of the employment system, on the other hand the dependence on the private supply of training opportunities and the risk of underinvestment in vocational education are seen as serious flaws of this model (cf. Clematide et al. 2005, 3). The state-‐controlled model of VET is characterised by a dominance of school-‐based vocational education, which is subject to a relatively tight regulation by state authorities. In this model, which is prevalent, for instance, in France or China, the regulation is based on the school’s logic of action and includes a focus on civic education. Enterprises do not have an institutionalised role in this system, but serve as suppliers of internships while all regulatory functions – planning, management and control – are concentrated in the public
2
sector. The contents of vocational education are typically based on theoretical and academic types of education (cf. Greinert 1998, 21–22). Due to the integration into the state-‐controlled education system there is a relatively close connection to general education. Moreover, the supply of training opportunities is independent of the provision of training places by private companies. The major difficulty of this system is the weak linkage to the labour market (cf. Clematide et al. 2005, 3). Type of Governance model rational of agency Employers a s c ustomers; individual training Market driven company needs determine VE curriculum & company training, transfer of skills to other companies rather difficult because many different certificates; VET example countries : UK, US, Ireland and Japan Merely school based, schools logic of action, State driven more theory driven, less work process driven; little real work orders, rather costly model while training labs need constant modernisation; more simulated instead of real work task completion, example VET countries: France, China, Spain, Portugal, Poland Occupation driven and / or cooperatist VET Mixed system regulation; employers associations great influence, in some countries governance also the unions, based collective bargening for defining occupations and their constant modernisation; Variations of systems in countries like Germany, Austria, Danmark, Netherlands, Northern regions of Italy and Switzerland
Diagramme 1.: Three main VET systems and their rationality The third model is referred to as occupation-‐based or corporatist regulation (cf. Greinert 1998, 19–20). This model is derived from the apprenticeship tradition in the craft trades. It is characterised by a strong influence of the training companies and the chambers and or professional associations, the corporate bodies that represent the business and trade community. This concerns the entry conditions to training as well as the definition of training contents and the ways the training and teaching processes are examined. Today occupation-‐based regulation is part of “mixed” systems of cooperative governance in which the regulation of vocational education takes place in a plural network of state bodies, enterprises or employers’ associations as well as trade unions or professional associations. Variations of these mixed models of regulations can be found in systems of cooperative (dual or alternating) VET as they exist in Austria, Denmark, Germany Norway and Switzerland. 4. Analysis of VET governance models within wider context A major finding of institutional studies on advanced industrial economies is that the ability of a country to develop human capital is conditioned by, and reflected in, the institutional context of political economy and adjacent domains (industrial relations, partisan politics,
3
etc.). The analysis of VET governance models needs to consider the wider national context (Rauner et.al. 2010) It has been argued that a coordinated VET governance model records advantages compared with a market-‐ or state-‐oriented governance model. Instead of delegation to the State or the Market, coordination ensures the optimal mix of individual autonomy and collective obligations. It combines a statutory core (regulation of training standards including examination) with flexible elements (firm-‐level flexible implementation). This is the outcome of historical power struggles between different interests (Busemeyer 2013) and it can be found in some features of the political economy of collective skill formation: for instance, training content regulation, which is defined statutorily but firms can decide how many apprentices to hire and for which occupations to train them. Moreover, compulsory membership in Chambers is balanced by voluntary membership in employers’ associations. Likewise, unions and vocational schools are involved in local governance, but employers have the upper hand. Finally, individual firms decide training investments, but collective agreements define apprentice pay levels and over social taxes and health insurances. A number of advantages seem indeed to be associated with coordinated governance model: smooth transitions from school to employment, comparative strong intermediate-‐level skills and politically sustainable solutions based on consensus. On the other hand, this would still have some disadvantages such as long decision-‐making and inflexible processes, the potential influence of special interests, weakness with regard to structural reforms. The coordinated model (typical for apprenticeships) an almost exclusively be identified in countries classified as ‘collective skill formation systems’ where occupational space dominates. These can be found in work-‐ based VET systems such as Austria, Switzerland, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands. Conversely, a market-‐centred VET governance system might constitute an obstacle rather than an asset for high quality skill formation, since it could be a response of demand to rising relative unit cost, due to government budgetary policy. If the government chooses to reduce the real growth of public spending on the service, its output grows more slowly and it may even fall. The effect on output may involve quantity, quality, or both. If the public buyer gives priority to quantity, then quality suffers. VET governance in liberal democracies encourage the prioritisation of quantity over quality, as a result of a number of factors, namely: restricted public spending, intertwined with the electoral politics of public spending and taxation; the greater visibility of policies prioritising quantity and the consequent political reward; the need of balancing social justice and efficiency among public goals; the marketisation and rebranding techniques, to highly publicise policy innovations. ‘Apprenticeship’s contribution to intermediate skills will continue to falter until better ways of ensuring quality and eliciting employer commitment are developed. Continental apprenticeship suggests promising alternatives’ (Ryan, Unwin, 2001, 112). 5. Strenght and Weaknesses of the apprenticeship model The situation is somewhat different in dual apprenticeship training. This model is characterised by the fact that the vocational education and training system is composed of two independent but interrelated subsystems, namely, an in-‐company training sector organised by private enterprises and a corresponding sector of vocational school instruction for which the state or associations or professional bodies are responsible (cf. Greinert 1998, 23–24). Although this model appears at a first glance as a combination of market and state regulation, there are also considerable elements of occupation-‐based and
4
corporatist governance. In Germany, for instance, the traditional strong role of the occupational principle (Berufsprinzip) entails a control of the access to vocational training by the occupational groups concerned. Following the tradition of the guilds and other professional association, they participate in the formulation of training curricula frameworks and influence the organisation of the external vocational examinations in practical and technical terms through the chambers of commerce and industry and craft trade, which are the bodies that officially represent the companies from the different sectors and branches In the following some strength and weaknesses of the dual system model system are summarised and this due to the fact that cooperate governance of the dual system is covering quite a lot of stakeholders and requires regulation (Arnold, Gonon 2006, 101). Strength Weaknesses Under economic recession the training 1. School to work transition ratio; youth 2.
3.
4. 5.
unemployment; direct involvement and investment of the economic forces Learning by practise and action, learning within real and holistic business task: planning, production, self – control and QM integrated (QDCA cycle) Good cost-‐benefit ratio: cost of training are shared under state and economy; public or semi like body covers only VET school; private companies invest into VET training Principle of subsidiarity; collective values and befits are shared despite individual company interest Both individual (apprentice) and collective (company) benefits: forms professional identity and vocational commitment
6. Early recognition of technical needs and
market change because of company force involvement and there associations
offers can be reduced; offer on training places can be difficult; It can be the case that the individual in company training system is weak; there is too little control over the quality of apprenticeship Apprenticeship is misused as cheap labour: not doing the right value work task
Learning venues coordination weak; resources for trainer and teacher and learning environment are missing Critical mass of stakeholders needed to follow such approach; if not survival of the VET system is under question; difficult to govern and time consuming to build consensus Keeping occupation‘s up to date as an extra effort; requires an constant innovation dialogue under stakeholders; needs cluster strategy support
One of the strongest arguments of the strength of the dual model is producing very little youth employment. Compared to other European states those countries with a dual model have the lowest youth unemployment ratio. The company is not only providing work place but also a learning venue. This has positive effects on the school to work ratio. This means that apprentices are real employees under special status (allowances, lower social taxes etc.) within the training company. A high percentage of them are needed as future employees and stay on after their training time. The critical point is the provision of enough training places in companies. This is the case when national or global markets come into economic recession (e.g. see the Japanese difficulties on transition of young people into their labour market). Another stronghold for dual training is that it follows the concept of work process learning. The real character of the work tasks – and its limitation to simulate them in schools or other bodies -‐ offers the chance for learning to deal with inside and outside the company
5
customers. The VET students learn better to plan, do, act and own control of work task (QDCA cycle) (Deitmer 2011b). This esteems them for self-‐control and in such a way that it is also productive for the company. This make’s it easier for the company to realise productivity increase; which work even when technical change takes place. To establish such work and learning system requires the existence of a company internal apprenticeship management system (e.g. designated apprenticeship training plan, co-‐trainers, training methods etc.). It is the point that such in company trainers are in place (they should have the expertise to implement and control in-‐company training plans) which are capable of establishing an company internal structures (e.g. training plans, identifying key work and learning task, following the training framework of the occupation, individual apprentice working place rotation plan: road maps). The weakness is, that there is no real quality control of the individual in-‐company training. It can be the case that the individual in company training system is too weak: too little challenging work task, apprentices do by over 50% such task where they only can learn very little (doing side work which do not require the skilled worker; only simple work; no rewarding complex and challenging work task, no touch to customer) (Deitmer 2011a, Rauner, Wittig 2013). While at least over 50 % of the cost of the dual system is financed by private sources makes this system relatively attractive for public bodies; here the public treasurer. While the companies also have to invest into the training there is all the time the danger that companies use the protected status of the apprentices to use them as cheap labour and have them work on task with little learning potential. In dual VET countries like Germany or Switzerland there are no direct control systems in place. This while too many efforts are needed; because these countries have training of trainers etc. which helps to overcome this weakness. In Cost benefit studies (Rauner, Wittig 2013) it can be shown that the productivity of apprentices in an company is above average when two main quality features are given: the strong emphasis on self-‐organised learning and the incorporation of learning and learners into the production process to allow them to make work experiences. The principle of subsidiarity is followed when the stakeholders of the VET systems take more strongly their position, this is the case, when the societal forces keep on going to undertake engagement into training duties of people and the state can take over rather are subsidarian role. The state finances only the school part of dual VET. Individual and collective benefits can be gained when companies – who are normally competitors – are organising collective benefits in regard to training when they share the knowledge about good training performance. This means that overall work force is relatively high skilled and which makes them just less vunerable against turbulences on the labour market changes. That there is early recognition on technical changes and its integration into training programmes is a further plus. Keeping the occupation‘s up to date is an extra challenge for companies and their representing associations or chambers; which requires an constant Innovation dialogue under stakeholders. The discussion of the strength and weaknesses shows that the model require relevant regulation and multiple governance. Such an multi measure and multi actor system is represented by many stakeholders from different interest groups which could harmonise and work together towards an common goal. But still they have the freedom to keep outside of such a collective arrangement. Therefore the innovation dialogue under the stakeholders is needed; which requires moderation and coordination. A sustainable and effective VET governance model should therefore include a high degree of coordination
6
between the bodies involved and should combine elements of input orientation like participation and deliberation with elements of output orientation such as performance orientation, efficiency and quality assurance (Rauner, Wittig 2013). 6. The governance evaluation tool: guiding principles, evaluation criteria and evaluation process The evaluation tool developed at the Institute Technology and Education (ITB), University of Bremen provides support for the assessment of governance mechanisms in VET by means of expert or stakeholder workshops (Deitmer 2011a, Rauner, Wittig 2013). Two objectives can be achieved with this tool, namely • a monitoring of the current state of affairs with regard to the governance and management of selected VET systems and • an in-‐depth evaluation of selected factors and dimensions of VET governance systems by national experts. The focus of the methodology is on national and or regional experts who are concerned with management and governance issues of their VET systems. The experts participate in a workshop where they express their views on the current state of affairs and rate the governance activities by means of the questionnaire described above. The role of the moderator is to support the evaluation process and to make sure that all participants have the opportunity to explain their views. Both the diverging and the converging ratings on the various criteria are clarified and discussed. The final discussion, in which the participants look for a consensus, offers the opportunity for a deeper understanding of the issues for all participants. This model is operationalised by an evaluation tool with deserves of several categories and criteria that are listed and explained below. There are seven main criteria, of which five relate to the integration of the system (i.e. coordination and fragmentation) and two to the dimension of input and output orientation. These main criteria are the following: Category A: Integrative systems from coordination to fragmentation Criteria 1: Consistency of the legal framework. Full Consistency is given when an unified legal framework exists even when it covers different legal domains. For a dual VET this would mean that different laws, e.g. from educational, labour market and economical domains would supplement each other. This is the case when one level of government (national, regional, or local level) is responsible for the enactment of the rules governing VET. Under this criteria it has to be also assessed how strictly a legal binding cooperation of the learning venues is demanded. If all learning venues of vocational education are covered by one relevant law the conditions for binding regulation is fulfilled. In this case the quality of these regulations has to be assessed. If in-‐ company training and school instruction fall into different legal domains it has to be assessed how effectively the cooperation between the learning venues is supported by the relevant laws. Criteria 2: Cooperation of the various bodies. It is assessed here whether the VET laws reflect roles and interest of all partners and learning venue bodies involved. This includes the sub criterium how the good cooperation is achieved. This includes the existence of an intense VET dialogue under social partners, colleges and/or researchers. The quality of participation in the VET dialogue (cooperation
7
of all relevant bodies in the organisation and shaping of vocational education) depends on whether there is a moderating and coordinating institution that has the competence to fulfil this function adequately for the entire system. Criteria 3: Innovation strategies. Innovative strategies covers all such criteria which help to develop and evaluate new strategies for the improvement of the VET governance performance. For the quality of cooperation of the learning venues there is the chance to improve them by pilot projects and programmes. These programmes aim to exploit the potentials of both learning venues and to connect them to each other. Following PISA and other VET related competence assessments there is widespread attention to instruments and methods that allow for the evaluation of vocational education and training effects in terms of the learning processes of VET students. The quality of the relevant innovation strategies has to be assessed. Criteria 5: Allocation of strategic and operational functions. Often VET is allocated to one policy area, like education or labour market policy, which often leads to the neglect of other policy fields. To achieve a balance already in the legal framework it has to be assessed to what extent this strategy was successful. The plurality of overarching policy objectives of vocational education is reflected in the involvement of various bodies. It has to be assessed whether the agents within the VET system represent a good equilibrium of the policy areas. Occupational profiles, curricula and training plans are an expression of empirically established qualification requirements as well as normative rules derived from the educational objectives. Furthermore, a compromise needs to be found between the company’s interest in specialised qualifications that “fit in” exactly, the interest of the sector in rather broad profiles and the individuals’ interest in a career. These interests and the underlying political orientations influence curriculum development procedures. It has to be assessed how successfully an equilibrium is achieved. Category B: Input versus output orientation Criteria 6: Outcome orientation The legal framework includes mandatory objectives and benchmarks (standards) for vocational education and training. This item aims to assess how strictly educational standards in the sense of competences to be acquired by the learners are fixed in the legal VET framework. The achievement made in VET is evaluated systematically. This means that it has to be assessed whether there exists, at the level of the national VET system, a practice of evaluating the attainment of quantitative benchmarks like entry rates, youth unemployment, external exam completion rates or items concerning the transition rate into the employment system or to higher education. Criteria 7: Input orientation The legal framework is based on the principle of closed curricula. The term “closed curricula” refers to regulations that specify not only the fundamental objectives of a training programme, but also the details of its realization (down to the concrete lesson!). This would mean that there is little room left for local adaptations and challenging the teachers competence. It has to be assessed to what extent the legal framework leaves the teachers and trainers good opportunities to shape the training process locally and within each training location. The completion of a specific curriculum is an admission requirement
8
for vocational examinations. It has to be assessed how strictly the completion of a specific learning trajectory in the sense of a regulated training programme with a fixed content and duration or in the sense of a fixed period of professional work experience (in the case of advanced programmes) is set as a mandatory requirement for the admission to the final examination. The above described seven main criteria are broken down into 30 sub-‐criteria and brought together into a questionnaire. The questionnaire is the basis for the evaluation and discussion process amongst experts from different expertise areas; like for example VET experts from associations, schools, companies, unions and ministries. The expert take part in the VET governance assessment workshop under moderation of an external evaluation team. The experts are asked to judge and rate the sub criteria on a scale from 1 (= not realised) to 10 (= fully realised). The external evaluation team collates the individual ratings on a wall chart or by computer system for everyone to see and moderates the discussion. On the basis of the often different individual ratings, the team moderates a discussion with the aim to explain first of all the rational for the ratings by the individual experts and secondly to achieve a consensus in order to formulate an collective expert opinion of the different criteria. This includes also the documentation of dissent; which is still possible that the positions cannot reach each other and stay different even in the light of the discussion. The aggregated answers determine the position of the VET system. The position on the horizontal axis “integration of the system” is defined by the mean of the values for the main criteria 1 to 5 with increasing numerical values indicating a higher degree of coordination. As regards the second dimension, the value is calculated on the basis of the mean of the two remaining main criteria 6 and 7. Given that the two main criteria have a reciprocal relationship so that a system is situated halfway between the poles of input and output control if the two criteria are equally realised, the values are standardised before the mean is calculated. The value expresses which of the two modes of governance have a stronger influence on the VET system in question. 7. Exemplary results from previous governance workshops An international comparsion study (Rauner et. al. 2010, Rauner, Wittig 2013) investigated the dual systems of VET in Denmark, Switzerland, Austria and Germany. A specific fokus of the study was the assessment of their governance systems. The results show remarkable differences under the VET systems evaluated, but also shows that evaluation method works well for delivering effective research results and supports expert focus group workshops. The positioning of the four countries verifies that in Germany the fragmention of governance is quite strong while in Denmark and in Switzerland there is a remarkable degree of coordination. Also Switzerland with its pronounced federalism and language pluralism has a well-‐developed and coordinated system of dual vocational education and training. After the reforms of the past decade Denmark can be regarded as an example of coordinated output-‐oriented governance. This is illustrated by the fact that the political responsibility is concentrated in one body. To some extent the German system can be regarded as the opposite model to the Danish VET system (Cort 2005). A long tradition of decentralisation has led to a strongly
9
fragmented governance system, as is already shown by the separation of the legislative powers for the two branches of vocational education and training. While the school part of dual apprenticeship training and the school-‐based VET programmes are under the responsibility of the states (Länder), the federal government is responsible for in-‐company training within dual VET. Finally, the domain of continuing vocational education and training is characterised by an uncoordinated variety of both federal and state regulations. Like Germany and Switzerland, Austria is characterised by strongly developed federal structures. However, contrary to Germany the responsibility for educational policy is concentrated at the federal level, and this applies also to vocational education. This allows for a better coordination of the system than in Germany. The implementation of VET is regulated at the state level, and the Federal Ministry of Education is the supervisory body for the entire education system. In recent years a number of reforms were implemented that followed the modern principles of deregulation and decentralisation, but the dominant paradigm is still juridical and bureaucratic. The diagramme shows results of the assessment workshops under of the four types of Governance. 10
9
8,6
8,6 7,9
8
7,6 7,3
7,1
7
7
7,22
7 6,7
6,4
6,2
6,2 5,9
6 5,4
5,3
5 4,1
4,3
4 3,2
3,3
3
2
1 1. consistent legal framework
2. cooperation of the various bodies
3. innovation strategies
4. balance of relevant policy areas
5. allocation of strategic and operational functions
Diagramme 2: Results of 4 expert focus group governance workshops under stakeholders and the evaluation criteria 1. upt to 5. With VET system in Denmark; Switzerland with better evaluation results than Austria and Germany (weakest position) (index: first column Denmark, second column Switzerland; third column Austria, fourth column Germany)
10
8. Outlook on the current problems within Indian Apprenticeship and the need for Governance Apprenticeship in India means a system of training in which an employer engages a person as an apprentice and to train him/her systematically in the designated trade (there are over 30 trades and industrial sectors) (Roy et.al., 2014). The Indian Apprenticeship Act (1961) was drawn up based on the principles of ‘learning by earning’ and ‘learning by doing’. The number of apprentices has remained stagnant and has not increased in numbers over the year. Only 215,000 persons are undergoing apprenticeship training against a seating capacity of 320,000 in 2008-‐2009 (Directorate General of Employment and Training (DGET), 2009). The India Apprenticeship System is state regulated and is involving manifold stakeholders. But it is a relatively tiny VET system compared to the Indian quantities. Dominant is school education (227 million pupils) or Technician Vocational Training (1 million) and Higher Education (14 million). Therefore the dual model has huge potential insofar while at the side of the formal system there is the huge informal apprenticeship system (estimations speak of 20 million novices are growing up their expertise on an informal basis). Further details on the current status of the formal apprenticeship is provided by the report of the Ministry of Labour and Employment’s (Mole 2011). The report highlights that,: • The intake of apprentices into industry is less than the capacity, • the participation rates of training establishments is increasing, • the number of successful apprentices in the Trade Test has increased, • in 8 trade areas there was neither intake capacity nor enrolments and • in 16 trade areas intake capacity existed but there were no enrolments. The report states that there is high potential for the growing up of the numbers of the Indian apprenticeship’s. But this only realistic when more parts of the informal could be formalised and increased in their quality and output but based on new ressources for minimum allowances, training support centres etc.. Therefore it worth to study and discuss some of the difficulties of the formal apprenticeship in order to learn about strategic turning points. First policy problem area is to overcome and to counteract towards the low status and bad image of apprenticeship and the lack of involvement of employers or chambers into curriculum design and the examinations. Also the not yet realised non-‐coverage of trades, like the service sector as another apprentice recruitment potential. All this calls for concerted governance action. Even when there are still difficulties there is the collective energy of the stakeholders which potentially could be activated by financial resources and collective strategy. This could help the system to overcome difficulties and grow again. While the Indian economy is embedded in fast social and market related change processes also the training models need quicker adaptation than in the past. This needs the commitment of the stakeholders also on the informal side of the national Indian economy. Beside the rapidly growing service sector there are Asian and European countries who may outsource technical support and customer services to India. There is potential growth potential in the Indian economy including manufacturing, ship construction, pharmaceuticals, aviations, biotechnology, tourism, retailing and information/communication technologies. Apprenticeships is regarded as a big part of a much broader policy thrust to improve the skill levels of the population whilst simultaneously addressing some of the social, economic and educational problems that confront India. What are the infrastructural deficits and challenges VET apprenticeships? There are manifold deficits and problems to be noted;
11
some of them are: lack of sufficient well trained teachers and trainers, lack of involvement of industrial associations, lack of accreditation and examination, lack of workplace curricula (Mole 2011, Roy et. al. 2014). But key to this all is the lack of effective governance models in place that help to structure debates about apprentice VET on regional and local level and allows to develop regional VET innovation networks (Attwell, Deitmer 2000). To develop the Indian apprenticeship model further the above described evaluation approach could be used as a group development instruments for the hand of the stakeholders. The aim would be to access the current status of governance practises by involving stakeholder of the apprenticeship system and to convince them for an evaluation of the current state of the art and to identify the particular weaknesses and hurdles of the apprentice cooperation. This with the intention to find out under which circumstances the cooperation of the private and public bodies can be enhanced and developed further. Therefore the above described evaluation tool would be a chance to deliver for a first diagnosis of the current cooperation culture and also to allow monitoring of running pilot projects which are used as a start to embetter the training situation. This could help to find out the potential of giving the informal apprenticeship system more formal elements and and services. But still there is too little information about the informal part of the Indian apprenticeships which by now are not yet officially registered or supported by any kind of minimum actions or project or programmes. The investigation of the cooperation potential and willingness of the partners to build for cooperation and to pilot and evaluate minimum support actions for the informal students (e.g. implementation of basic occupational profiles, work place curricula, designating and teaching of trade related trainers etc.) could be a start. A collective strategy by involvement of the key stakeholders needs to be developed. This than could govern the change process and allows to develop an intentional strategy by using different view points: Industry, Associations, Schools, Polytechnics, Local and Regional Administrations. 9. Conclusions The main argument would be that an coordinated and occupation based VET governance model delivers for some more advantages compared with marked or state oriented governance models. The strength of the apprentices models and the prospected rise of the skilled labour market segment with falling figures for unskilled and low skilled labour delivers additional arguments for the apprenticeship approach. This model ensures an optimal mix of individual choices and collective obligations. These are based on regulated training standards with firm level flexible implementation. The INAP memorandum by the INAP commission explains what it would mean to develop apprenticeship models, like the one in India. Following the work of the INAP commissions on which some of these quality requirements are presented (see INAP memorandum, in: Deitmer et.al. 2013): (1) A better balance between an national and regional or local VET policy. This would mean an more strategic orientation allocated at the national level on the one hand, and localisation of national standards with adequate room for manoeuvre for local VET agents of local VET practice on the other.
12
(2) A limited number occupational profiles (Switzerland or Denmark have 100 to 200 occupations defined not over 350 as in Germany or Austria) with preferably international relevance should offer guidance to trainees, trainers and teachers. The curriculum for a training occupation is termed and integrated plan when it serves as a basis for the design of learning processes at the enterprise, the vocational school or industrial training centre. (3) In-‐company training must be organised in such a way as to ensure self-‐financing through the productive work of the trainees. In countries with developed VET systems it turned out that this condition can be met. On average of the training costs are covered or even exceeded by the training revenue. (4) Vocational education has to be integrated into the national systems of education to enable trainees to attain a university entrance qualification. Here Switzerland is an example of best practice, since 90% of the students at universities of applied sciences have completed a dual vocational training programme before their studies. This can help to enhance the attractiviness of the VET apprenticeship system and to overcome image problems in vocational education and training. (5) It is advantegous when a larger proportion of the enterprises (INAP speaks of ca. 30-‐ 35%; even though in Countries like Germany with its 25 % figures this still could be improved) have to be willing and able to participate in modern vocational training. Learning in instructive work processes, reflected work experience, is one of the key essential of this type of vocational training. In modern dual vocational training, between 50 and 70% of the training time are assigned to learning in the work process. The question remains whether an integrated development strategy for sustainable VET governance can be also developed for countries like India or other Asian countries. This relates also to the key point in how far the mentioned standards and governance evaluation tools can help to overcome skill shortages but also bridge knowledge of how to develop the right decisions in order to move forward to a renaissance of apprenticeships in which work based learning (of 50 % up to 70% of the training time) takes place. References: Arnold, R., Gonon, P. (2006). Einführung in die Berufspädagogik, Opladen: Budrich Deitmer, L.; Attwell, G.. (2000) Partnerships and networks a dynamic approach to learning in global regions. In: Barry Nyhan, Ludger Deitmer, Graham Attwell (2000) (Eds.): Towards the Learning Region. Education and Regional Innovation in the European Union and the United States. Luxemburg Office for Official Publications of the European Communities Bertelsmann Stiftung (eds.) (2009). Steuerung der beruflichen Bildung im internationalen Vergleich. Gütersloh: Verlag Bertelsmann Stiftung. Busemeyer M. R., Trampusch C. (eds.), The Political Economy of Collective Skill Formation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Clematide, B., Dahl, A., Vind, A., Joergensen, C. H. (2005). Challenges for the Danish VET-‐ system – on the path towards a new future model. Berufs-‐ und Wirtschaftspädagogik online, 7. http://www.bwpat.de/7eu/clematide_etal_dk_bwpat7.pdf. Accessed 12 April 2007.
13
Cort, P. (2005). The Danish Vocational Education and Training System. Resource document. Danish Ministry of Education, Department for Vocational Education and Training. http://pub.uvm.dk/2005/VET/87-‐603-‐2524-‐0.pdf. Accessed 11 April 2007. Deitmer, L. (2011a) Building up of innovative capabilities of workers. In: Fostering Enterprise: The Innovation And Skills Nexus -‐ Research Readings, ED.: Penelope Curtin, NCVER: National Centre Vocational Education Research, Adelaide Deitmer, L. (2011b) Quality Criteria for Establishing Work-‐ Based Learning. IN: An Evaluation of In-‐Company Learning Arrangements, Tayo Fashoyin, Michele Tiraboschi, Pietro Manzella, Lisa Rustico (Eds.) Productivity Investment In Human Capital And The Challenge Of Youth Employment, Cambridge Scholars Publishing Deitmer, L., Hauschild, U., Rauner, F. und Zelloth, H., (EDS.). (2013) The Architecture Of Innovative Apprenticeship. Dordrecht: Springer DEITMER, L.; GERDS, P.. (2002): Developing a regional VET dialogue on vocational education and training. A platform for bridging between VET provision and private organisational needs. Ed..: Pekka Kamärarainen, Graham Attwell, and Alan Brown Transformation of learning in education and training, CEDEFOP reference series 37, Luxembourg Directorate General of Employment and Training. (2009). Annual Report 2008-‐2009. Ministry of Labour and Employment (MOLE), New Delhi: Government of India, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Survey and Study Division. Greinert, W.-‐D. (1998). Das “deutsche” System der Berufsausbildung. Tradition, Organisation, Funktion. 3rd edition. Baden-‐Baden: Nomos. http://labour.nic.in/annrep/annrep2008.htm INAP (International Network on Innovative Apprenticeship). Memorandum ‘An Architecture for Modern Apprenticeships’.Standards for Structure, Organisation and Governance. INAP Commission “Architecture Apprenticeship”, April 2012. Available from Internet: http://www.inap.uni-‐ bremen.de/dl/memorandum_inap_commission_architecture_apprenticeship_2012.pdf [cited 2.1.2015]. Ministry of Labour and Employment (MOLE) (2011).Trade Apprenticeship Training in India Under Apprenticeship Training Scheme. New Delhi: Government of India, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Survey and Study Division. Rashidi, R. (2013). The framework for effective collaboration between public institutions and private industry in context of the National Dual Training System (NDTS) environment in Malaysia, University Tun Hussein: Jahor Rauner, F.; Wittig, W. (2013). Differences in the Organisation of Apprenticeship in Europe: Findings of a Comparative Evaluation Study. In: Deitmer, L.; Hauschildt, U.; Rauner, F.; Zelloth, H. (eds). The Architecture of Innovative Apprenticeship. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 243-‐255. Rauner, F.; Wittig, W.; Deitmer, L. (2010). Plural Administration in Dual Systems in Selected European Countries. In: Rauner, F.; Smith, E. (eds). Rediscovering Apprenticeship: Research Findings of the International Network on Innovative Apprenticeship. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 31-‐43. (Technical and Vocational Education and Training Series, Vol. 11). Roy, B. (2012). ‘India’, In E. Smith & R. Brennan Kemmis (Eds). Compilation of country case studies for the ‘Possible futures for the Indian Apprenticeships system’ project. Ballarat, Australia: University of Ballarat Ryan, P. and L. Unwin (2001), ‘Apprenticeship in the British ‘training market’, National Institute Economic Review, 178, pp. 99-‐114
14
15
