Comments to the Comments to the GermanGerman Case Case: : New & updated job profiles for New & updated job profiles for

apprenticeship trainingapprenticeship training

Miroslav ProcházkaMiroslav Procházka

the Czech Republicthe Czech Republic

Workshop 2: Structural Conditions for Change / Improvement(Institutional arrangements for quality assurance, meeting labour market needs & planning improvement in IVET)

Graz May 11 – 12 2006

IVET and CVET in the CZ: recent development

The Parliament has adopted the act on accreditation and validation of further education The National Qualification Framework is being prepared The way of final examination in vocational training fields of study is being changed (in sense of wider participation of main actors – schools and employers – in framing and realisation of the exam) A curricular reform is slowly starting (it is based on the principle of 2-level creation of the curricula)

Quality Assurance becomes the key factor for each of these steps is successful

Main aspects of quality

Functional relevance: extent of correspondence between qualification structure and structure of current and anticipative needs of labour market - it depends on methodology of a labour market needs survey and on the way of creating curricula (training regulation) Functional effectiveness: extent of correspondence between anticipated aims and achievements – it depends on the way of provision

Adequacy: extent of correspondence between aspirations and real opportunities – both individually and institutionally Effectiveness: achievements comparing with invested resources

Conceptual framework of the comments

Functional relevance is closest to the defined topic of the workshop The basic difference between UK and Germany (especially in the way of provision of IVET) is not relevant from our (workshop) point of view

It is difficult and problematic to compare only parts of educational systems without reflecting context

I will focus especially on the context; appropriate balance of various views on quality (of the whole system, not only its parts) provides the total view.

General questions

Isn´t high quality in one view complemented with problems of other (wider) concept of quality? Are different aims (and quality concepts) in conflict? Basic conflict (tension) in IVET between :

the need to accomplish especially current demands of labour market (employers) and to respect long-term needs of trainees (lifelong employability, flexibility, key competencies, preparing for civil life)

Specific questions

Are there any data on unemployment rate for DS graduates in comparison with other forms of training (especially full time vocational schools) just after completing the studies and later (possible according to age)?

Youth unemployment rates (% of the labour force aged 15 - 24)

2000 2001 2002

EU 15 15 15 15

ACC 10 29 31 32

EU 25 18 17 18

DE 9 8 10UK 12 12 12

CZ 18 17 17

Specific questions

Are there any data on “professional stability” (whether they have been still doing what they have learnt) or are there any other data on flexibility of DS graduates? How the graduates perform as soon as they enter the “open” labour market?

Professional stability of people with upper secondary education

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1996 20-24 24-29 all

D

C

B

A

Professional stability

• The extensive analysis of LFS data researched correspondence between a branch of study and a profession being performed

• 4 categories: A - full matching, B - partial

matching, C - partial difference, D – great miss-matching

• 1996: roughly 5 years after leaving school• 2001: all, 20-24, 25-29

Specific questions

What is the perspective trend in relationship between demand for placement in DS and

supply of positions in enterprises? Is it true what is sometimes declared, that the number of employers disposed to have apprentices is decreasing? If it is true, does it mean

something for DS itself or for the role of schools?

Specific questions

What is the reason for relatively high

proportion of “early school leavers” and relatively low proportion of people with at least upper secondary level?

Isn´t the insufficient capacity of DS (combining with low full-time schools prestige) one of the reasons?

Share of the population (18-24) with only lower-secondary education and not in ed.

2002 2003 2004

EU 25 16,4 15,9 15,9

DE 12,6 12,8 12,8

UK 17,7 16,7 16,7

CZ 5,5 6,0 6,1

% of the population (20-24) having completed at least upper-secondary education

2002 2003 2004

EU 25 76,6 76,7 76,4

DE 73,3 72,5 72,8

UK 77,2 78,2 76,4

CZ 91,7 92,0 90,9

Specific questions

Is development of aprentices´ general and key competencies sufficient?

Prospectively, is the theoretic education sufficient?

Percentage of pupils with reading literacy proficiency level 1 and lower (PISA)

2000 2003

EU 19,4 19,8

DE 22,6 22,3

UK 12,8

CZ 17,5 19,4

Specific questions

What is the vertical permeability (opportunity for the graduates from DS to continue studies on tertiary level)?

What will be the level of qualifications obtained in DS in EQF?

Are the qualifications obtained in DS equivalent to those obtained at full-time schools (formally, practically)?

Concluding remarks

DS is excellent in fulfilling the aim of meeting the needs of employers

It is not clear about sufficient fulfilling the aim of long-term and broader needs of trainees

(both they in DS and they don´t undergo DS and don´t continue at higher or university education)