1 / 14

VET vs general education in macedonia : Education policy perspective

VET vs general education in macedonia : Education policy perspective. “VET for social inclusion in the Western Balkans and Turkey: towards Regional Actions”, Torino, 12-13 December 2011 Prepared by: Prof. Suzana Bornarova PhD Institute for Social Work and Social Policy

gaye
Download Presentation

VET vs general education in macedonia : Education policy perspective

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. VET vs general education in macedonia:Education policy perspective “VET for social inclusion in the Western Balkans andTurkey: towards Regional Actions”, Torino, 12-13 December 2011 Prepared by: Prof. SuzanaBornarova PhD Institute for Social Work and Social Policy Faculty of Philosophy, Skopje, Macedonia

  2. VET system • Delivered through 173 VET programmes within 110 USS and 6 higher vocational schools (2 public; 4 private; 6 semesters) • VET available for 30 occupations • Qualifications: - I-st level: training for jobs with lower requirements (up to 2 years) - II-nd level: vocational training for occupation (3 years) - III-rd level: technical education (4 years) - IV-th level: postsecondary education and training

  3. Pupils/students in upper-secondary and higher vocational education Source: State Statistical Office

  4. General vs vocational education programmes in upper-secondary schools

  5. Share of pupils in upper-secondary education in 2001/2002 and 2009/2010

  6. USS according to language of instruction (2001/2002 and 2009/2010)

  7. Pupils in general and vocational secondary schools per gender 2009/2010

  8. Effective educational practices • Programmes overburdened with theory: - II-nd level qualifications: The general education takes up 50% of the three year vocational education, the vocational theory 30% and the practical training 20% • III-rd level qualifications: general education takes up 45% technical education, the vocational theory 35%, the practical training 10 % and elective instructions 10% (final+matura exam). • Low level of provision of work place training opportunities by businesses and firms

  9. Effective educational practices • Inclusiveness or segregation: • Heterogeneous per: gender, socio-economic status, rural/urban, ability • Homogeneous : in some cases per ethnicity • Family/community involvement: parental meetings/school boards/individual contacts; disengagement of parents; no impact on decision-making in school; no involvement in curriculum development or evaluation; no internet/phone communcation; no involvement of community members nor community education • Academic expectations (of students, teachers, families): low aspirations; no individualised help to stimmulate academic endeavors

  10. Effective educational practices • VET teaching: insufficient teacher training (traditional teaching methods, authoritarian relations with students/families); human resources; technical/financial resources; ex-catedra instead of interactive approach; low student participation • Strategies used by VET schools to reduce school failure and increase social cohesion in school neighbourhood and communities are nearly non-existent • Cooperative learning (no peer-mentors/peer learning groups) • Democratic values in curriculum: citizen’s education instead of cross-culturalism; multiculturalism • Diversity consideration: gender stereotyping

  11. VET status • Reserved for students with lower educational achievements • Attracts minority students • Less strict entry criteria and study requirements (high pass rates) • Stigmatisation (VET for poor/GE for elite/well-off) • Related to lower socio-economic status of students

  12. Labour market supply

  13. VET vs General education: Educational policy perspective • Education as ALTERNATIVE to social protection: Higher investments in education lower investments in social protection and vice versa! • Education as INSTRUMENT for prevention of social exclusion

  14. VET vs General education: Educational policy perspective

More Related