Apprenticeship, Pathways and Career Guidance:

A Cautionary Tale

Richard Sweet

INAP

Turin, 17 September 2009

Siegfried

Wellgunde

Flosshilde Bronnlinde

Unwary policy maker

Apprenticeship

Unwary policy maker

Apprenticeship

“... It is important that every community in every State of this nation develop more school-to-work programs. The best alternative is to craft an American version of European apprenticeships - not necessarily just like the German system, but one that blends vocational and academic education in high school, provides students meaningful work experience, and continues their training after graduation.”

Bill Clinton, Governor of Arkansas, Vocational Education Journal, October 1991

Very few countries have large apprenticeship systems for youth

Apprentices as a share of upper secondary enrolments(Mid 1990s estimate)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70Source: OECD, 2000

Apprenticeship: failure and success

• Failure– Korea– Sweden– United States

• Success– Ireland– Norway

Why?

• “Hard” institutional factors– Legislation and regulation– Training wages– Financing systems– Qualifications and certification arrangements

• “Soft” institutional factors– The quality of governance– Social capital at the local level

Today:

• Apprenticeship pathways and:

Aspirations Equity Career guidance

Pathways

EDUCATION AND TRAINING

PROGRAMSDESTINATIONS

INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGMENTS

Aspirations

15 year-olds aspiring to tertiary education, 2003 (%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Germ

any

Switzerla

nd

Austria

Nether

lands

Denmar

k

Poland

Czech

Repub

lic

Slovak

Rep

ublic

Finlan

d

France

Portugal

Icel

and

New Zeala

nd

Luxem

bourg

Norway

Italy

Belgiu

mSpai

n

Hungary

Mex

ico

Sweden

Irela

nd

Australia

japan

United

State

s

Greece

Canada

Turkey

Korea

%

Source: OECD PISA 2003 database

Equity

In equitable countries, achievement depends upon talent, not upon

family background

Variance in science achievement explained by family socio-economic status (%), 2006

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

Luxem

bourg

Hungary

France

Belgiu

m

Slovak

Rep

ublic

Germ

any

United

State

s

Mex

ico

Nether

lands

Portugal

Turkey

New Zeala

nd

Switzerla

nd

Czech

Repub

lic

Austria

Greece

Poland

Denmar

k

Spain

United

Kingdom

Irela

nd

Australia

Sweden Ita

ly

Finlan

d

Norway

Canada

Korea

Japa

n

Icel

and

%

Source: PISA 2006

Streaming within school systems

• Some countries stream strongly and at an early age

– Austria, Germany, Luxembourg, Switzerland

• Some countries delay streaming until a later age

– Canada, Denmark, Japan, Norway

A model of ability streaming and wealth streaming in schooling

High achievers and low achievers are in different schools

The wealthy are not in the same schools as the poor

High achievers and low achievers are in the same schools

The wealthy are in the same schools as the poor

Low equity

High equity

Ability streaming, streaming by wealth and apprenticeship

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Between school variance explained by socio-economic status (%)

Be

twe

en

sc

ho

ol v

ari

an

ce

in s

cie

nc

e p

erf

orm

an

ce

ISLFIN

NOR SWE ESP

DNK

CAN

MEX

KOR

CZE

DEU

BEL

NZL

SVK

GRC

AUT

CHE

USALUX

NZL

PRT

UKM

AUS

IRL

TUR

NLD

ITAJPN

OECD average

Low streaming by SES

Low streaming by achievement

High streaming by achievement

High streaming by SES

Equity and pathway size

Equity and vocational pathways, 2006

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0

Variation in achievement explained by socio-economic status, 2006 (%)

Up

pe

r s

ec

on

da

ry e

nro

lme

nts

in v

oc

ati

on

al p

rog

ram

me

s (

%)

LUXDEU

CHE

BEL

SVK

NLD

CZE

AUT

FIN

ITA

SWE

NOR

DNK

ISL

KOR

JPN

CAN

IRL

ESPPOL

FRA

TUR

GRC PRT

HUN

MEX

Low equity, large upper secondary VET

OECD average

High equity, small upper secondary VET

High equity, large upper secondary VET

Low equity, small upper secondary VET

Equity and tertiary pathways, 2006

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0

Variation in achievement explained by socio-economic status, 2006 (%)

Te

rtia

ry q

ua

lifie

d 2

5-3

4 y

ea

r-o

lds

, 20

06

(%

)

AUS

AUT

KOR

CANJPN

DEU

CHE

HUN

SVK

TUR

CZE

MEXPRT

GRCPOL

Low equity, small tertiary

FIN

NOR SWE

IRL

UKM

ESP

DNK

High equity, large tertiary systems

ITA

ISL

LUX

FRABEL

US

NZL

NLD

OECD average

Career guidance

Schools in which career guidance is compulsory, 2006

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Portugal

Czech

Repub

lic

Hungary

Slovak

Rep

ublic

Belgiu

m

Austria

Icel

and

Germ

any

United

State

s of A

mer

ica

Irela

nd

New Zeala

ndIta

ly

Luxem

bourg

Mex

ico

Turkey

Canada

Switzerla

ndKore

a

Sweden

Australia

Denmar

k

Spain

Nether

lands

United

Kingdom

Finlan

d

Greece

Norway

Japa

n

% o

f al

l sc

ho

ols

Difference in achievement levels between schools where guidance is compulsory and schools where it is voluntary

Guidance favours high achievers

Guidance favours low achievers-80

-60

-40

-20

00

20

40

60

80

100

Switzerla

nd

Luxem

bourg

Germ

any

Austria

Czech

Repub

lic Italy

United

State

s of A

mer

ica

Portugal

Icel

and

Australia

New Zeala

nd

Hungary

Irela

nd

Finlan

d

Sweden

Spain

United

Kingdom

Denmar

k

Norway

Mex

ico

Slovak

Rep

ublic

Nether

lands

Canada

Japa

n

Turkey

Belgiu

m

Korea

Greece

Co

mp

uls

ory

min

us

volu

nta

ry

Teachers’ tertiary focus and guidance

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

Irela

nd

Portugal

Belgiu

m

Slovak

Rep

ublic

Hungary

Icel

and

Australia

Nether

lands

Canada

Mex

ico

Japa

n

Norway

United

Kingdom

Denmar

k

Spain

Greece

Korea

Austria

United

State

s of A

mer

ica

Switzerla

nd

Germ

any

Italy

New Zeala

nd

Czech

Repub

lic

Luxem

bourg

Turkey

Guidance more likely when tertiary focus of teachers is strong

Guidance more likely when tertiary focus of teachers is incidental

Guidance equally likely

Either not provided or all teachers provide it

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Korea

Belgiu

m

Hungary

Greece

Mex

ico

Italy

Japa

n

Austria

Switzerla

nd

United

State

s of A

mer

ica

Luxem

bourg

Slovak

Rep

ublic

Portugal

Icel

and

Nether

lands

Canada

Germ

any

Czech

Repub

lic

Spain

Irela

nd

Norway

New Zeala

nd

Australia

United

Kingdom

Sweden

Denmar

k

Finlan

d

Per

cen

t o

f al

l sc

ho

ols

Specific teachers or counsellors are employed by the school

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Belgiu

m

Korea

Switzerla

nd

Hungary

Germ

any

Mex

ico

Greece

United

Kingdom

Italy

Denmar

k

Austria

Japa

n

Nether

lands

United

State

s of A

mer

ica

Luxem

bourg

Portugal

Canada

Icel

and

Slovak

Rep

ublic

Sweden

Czech

Repub

lic

Spain

New Zeala

nd

Irela

nd

Australia

Norway

Finlan

d

Per

cen

t o

f al

l sc

ho

ols

Visiting counsellors provide it

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Norway

Spain

Australia

Italy

Mex

ico

United

State

s of A

mer

ica

Hungary

Czech

Repub

lic

Canada

Greece

Korea

Icel

and

Portugal

Sweden

Nether

lands

Belgiu

m

Switzerla

nd

Germ

any

United

Kingdom

Denmar

k

% o

f al

l sc

ho

ols

External and experiential focus of careers

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

Belgiu

m

Korea

Mex

ico

Turkey

Irela

nd

Spain

Hungary

Slovak

Rep

ublic

Icel

and

Greece

Luxem

bourg

Sweden

Portugal

United

State

s of A

mer

ica

Italy

Nether

lands

New Zeala

nd

Switzerla

nd

Norway

Finlan

d

Canada

Czech

Repub

lic

Denmar

k

United

Kingdom

Austria

Australia

Germ

any

Ind

ex v

alu

e (m

axim

um

=10

0)

Source: PISA 2006. Index of job fairs, business lectures and industry visits

Conclusions about guidance (1)

• Whether or not career guidance is provided does not seem to be linked to pathways

• However who gets it does:– In Germany and Switzerland, and perhaps

Austria, career guidance seems to be pathway-dependent

– In Denmark and Norway, and perhaps the Netherlands it seems to be provided more equitably

Conclusions about guidance (2)

• How career guidance is provided does seem to be linked to pathways

– In all apprenticeship countries, career guidance seems to have a strong external, experiential and labour market focus

Conclusions

• The relationship between apprenticeship, pathways, equity and career guidance differs

– Germany and Switzerland on the one hand– Denmark and Norway on the other– Austria and the Netherlands somewhere in between