Bibliographie complète

Vocational education and training (VET) is often defined by its specific content or the purpose of training. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO), for example, define VET as ‘means of preparing for occupational fields and for effective participation in the world of work’ (UNEVOC 2006: 1). Such a technical definition seems inadequate, since university education also prepares students for the world of work and often for specific occupational fields. For professionals like doctors, teachers or lawyers, the occupational fields are sometimes even better defined and demarcated than those for vocational training. Thus the main difference between VET and higher education lies not in the preparation for work but in the earlier specialization for an occupational field and the lower social status of VET. In some countries, the low status of VET can easily be recognized if less neutral language is used, with VET being described as offering pathways for academically weaker students. The social status of VET is determined by its position not only in the education system but also in the labour market. VET certainly enjoys higher esteem in countries in which it opens up access to well-paid jobs with complex tasks and good career opportunities than it does in countries with polarized job structures and high shares of low-skill, low-paid jobs offering few career opportunities. Depending on the quality of the VET, the signals vocational certificates give to employers might differ from country to country. In some countries, they might signal competency to perform complex tasks autonomously in a broad occupational field; in others, however, they might signal that the holder is a low achiever in the school system and possesses only narrowly based skills for specific jobs.