Development of Vocational Training

European Centre for the

Development of Vocational Training

Scenarios and Strategies

for Vocational Education and Training in Europe

Report about the survey undertaken in the framework of the joint CEDEFOP/ETF project in the United Kingdom

by Tom Leney and Alison Wolf, Institute for Education, University of London and Mike Coles, Qualification and Cirriculum Authority (QCA), London

Contents

Page

Section 1Introduction and overview1

Section 2Scenarios – a useful tool?5

Section 3The results of the UK survey8

Section 4The European Report15

Section 5The UK seminar17

Section 6Recommendations25

Appendix IUK Responses to the questionnaires26

Appendix 2Comments made by respondents to the questionnaires32

Appendix 3VET systems in the UK: An outline of recent changes49

“Everything that’s in the world when you are born is just normal. Anything that gets invented between then and when you turn 30 is incredibly exciting and with any luck you can make a career out of it. Anything that gets invented after you’re 30 is the end of civilisation as we know it until it’s been around for 10 years, when it gradually turns out to be all right really.”

Douglas Adams, A Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Internet (Sunday Times, 29 August 1999)

Section 1Introduction and overview

This section of the report introduces the European VET Scenarios Project to the participants in the UK seminar, and provides an overview of the results that are emerging from the first phase of the project in the UK and across Europe.

The aims of the project

The project is developing a range of alternative scenarios for the future development of vocational education and training (VET) in the participating member states of the European Union (EU) and in several central and eastern European (CEE) countries[1]. The project is also exploring the usefulness of VET scenarios as a tool to improve our understanding of VET systems in their various contexts, in the hope that they can become a useful basis for informing policy makers at national and European level.

The objectives of the European VET Scenarios Project are:

To develop a method for constructing scenarios for VET - by linking and making sense of a range of trends and strategies.

To gather and analyse data on the views of experts - so as to be able to build, at least in a preliminary way, alternative national and European scenarios.

To explore with policy makers, social partners and other stakeholders the potential of VET scenarios as a policy and decision-making tool.

The research in the UK is being conducted at the Institute of Education in London in collaboration with QCA.

The seminar

The UK national seminar is being held as the project comes towards the end of its first phase. Participants in the seminar have an expertise in associated policy development and/or research. The objectives of the seminar are to consider the UK data in the light of European data; and to make a first attempt to develop the range of scenarios that have arisen from UK and European research. Another purpose of the seminar is to discuss potentially useful strategies for operation within these scenarios and to gain advice on potentially useful methods for the second phase of the project.

‘Scenarios’

Clearly, it is helpful to provide a working definition. We take scenarios to be images of expected or hoped-for futures. Creating scenarios means building up narrative descriptions of the future and trying to focus attention on important causal processes and key points of decision making. This involves linking trends, expectations, causal factors and strategies. Here, we are looking at a ten-year time frame.

Our research focused on ‘expected’ aspects of scenarios, but respondents’ comments often highlighted what they ‘hoped for’.

Because the whole purpose of scenario thinking is to explore the inter-relationship between trends and strategies, accuracy in predicting the future is not necessarily the best measure of a good scenario. In fact, scenario building might be particularly useful in times when change is rapid, but outcomes are pretty uncertain. Criteria for a useful range of scenarios include their plausibility and the usefulness of each scenario in policy making.

We take VET to refer to both initial and continuing vocational education and training. Section 2 of this report will consider how scenarios thinking might be applied in the field of VET.

Data collection in the UK and across Europe

Earlier this year, the partners in the eleven participating countries jointly developed three questionnaires, then each sent some 600 questionnaires in total to 10 categories of experts. In the UK one of the questionnaires was sent to each respondent. The respondents were selected from nationally published listings to comprise 10 categories of expects in a range of fields relating to VET. This generated some 210 responses and has provided data as to the views of a range of expert stakeholders concerning future trends and appropriate strategies for VET and related contexts.

The questionnaires were divided into three contexts: Economy and technology; Employment and the labour market; and, Training, skills and knowledge. In each context the respondents were asked to score and comment on the importance and likelihood of 23 trends and the relevance of 20 strategies.

While the small size of the sample in each country (linked to a high degree of consensus on many issues in the UK) means that some of the national results must be treated with caution, they are useful. The international results should provide an accurate cross-section of stakeholders’ views as to the future of vocational education and training across Europe.

The analysis of the data gathered through this survey has brought us to the point where we can begin to construct scenarios for VET in the UK.

The UK – main conclusions

Here, we draw out the salient points from the survey conducted in the UK. Section 3 of this report gives more detail of each of the UK findings. Appendix 1 lists all the trends that respondents were questioned about, and likelihood and importance that they attributed to each one.

Many of the questions across all three questionnaires deal with the wide range of factors linked to what is now usually called globalisation, and the impact that these factors will have on the economy, working life and training. The UK survey indicates a striking consensus that these factors will have a major impact over the next decade. Most UK respondents believe that market-driven changes, rather than social considerations, are set to dominate.

There is less of a consensus, however, concerning the likelihood and importance of partnerships developing between different players, and of the role of sectoral organisations, regions and SMEs.

There is also less of a consensus about the impact of demographic factors – such as the ageing of the population and migration. Furthermore, predictions about the impact of changes on different age and social groups vary. Consider, for example, the impact of young people’s transitions through education and training to work on economic development and social exclusion. We consider that these factors merit further investigation as we turn from the trends to scenario building.

In terms of VET, our respondents anticipate strongly a number of trends. VET is likely to become increasingly outcome-based, and courses and qualifications are likely to become more individualised and differentiated. ICT will become a normal part of education and training; key, transferable skills will gain in importance. Individuals will be expected to take more responsibility for their own training. Finally, education and training policies will become more integrated with other policies and strategies.

Turning to strategies, we found no major differences between the views of different stakeholders as to who should take responsibility for implementing particular strategies. The small size of the UK sample made it impossible to compare and contrast all constituent groups. However, we could carry out grouped comparisons. These showed overwhelming agreement between those involved in the private and public sectors, including observers and researchers, as to the relative importance of different agencies in implementing VET strategies. Here, the results create some ambiguity concerning the role of individuals in managing their own learning. In spite of the importance attributed to this in the trends analysis, respondents ascribe very little importance to individuals in developing VET strategies. Interestingly, the European Commission is seen as having quite a significant role.

Further statistical analysis (factor analysis) that we have conducted points up the important of several combinations of factors. For the economy and technology these are, inter alia, the following clusters: factors associated with industrial restructuring; those linked with the impact of changes on cultures and people’s lifestyles; factors associated with what is now often called the knowledge society.

In the employment context, two interesting clusters emerge. One links the mobility of labour and multiculturalism. Those who think that increased labour mobility among jobs is most likely expect greater multiculturalism and migration, and vice versa. The other links change with patterns of social exclusion. Pessimistic and optimistic views, which we think worth exploring further, are emerging.

Factors relating directly to VET developments remain difficult to interpret on the evidence we have. However, one emerging factor – which clearly links to many of the comments that respondents took the time to make across all three questionnaires – indicates an emerging dichotomy between optimists and pessimists amongst respondents.

Underlying many of the doubts expressed (here we refer to ‘hoped for’ as opposed to expected futures) seems to be the tension between the development of a flexible, demand-led system and one that can guarantee access and combat social exclusion. Strikingly, companies are seen as likely to play only a marginal role in the training of the unemployed and those preparing for work.

The draft European report

Happily, the first draft of the European report became available, just before the national seminar took place. We distributed it to participants with their final papers, a week or so in advance of the seminar.

The European Report, which is based on the data from all the participating countries, confirms our findings and – because of all the additional data available – is able to take aspects of the analysis further than we can. While outcomes differ between countries, there is also a considerable degree of consistency and similarity. Whether this applies only to the pressures that VET systems need to respond to, or whether it will also extend to strategies and solutions that different countries adopt will be interesting to follow through.

The co-ordinating team in Amsterdam used the multi-national data to suggest preliminary areas of uncertainty for each of the three main contexts. Two variants are offered for Context C.

We set these out below.

Figure I: European areas of uncertainty (provisional)

Context / Interactive issues identified for building scenarios
A / Economy and technology / The extent to which companies restructure to become/ remain competitive
The extent to which partnerships are formed with VET providers
B / Employment and labour market / The extent of labour mobility
The extent of modernisation occurring in the workplace
C / Training, skills and knowledge
First Version / The extent to which VET providers are responsive to changing needs
The demand for key or transferable skills, alongside specific skills needed in the work setting
C / Training, skills and knowledge
Second Version / The extent to which training is an individual responsibility
The extent to which training protects the interests of certain social groups

Section 4 of this report builds up the suggested scenarios. The draft European report provides detail and more background.

Section 2Scenarios – a useful tool?

The notion of scenarios has strong connotations through common sense and everyday use, so it is worth pausing to outline the main aspects of the methodology that we are adopting.

Here, we also set scenarios thinking alongside two other ways of involving stakeholders in policy development and formulation. One is used frequently by the government in the UK, the other developed mainly in France.

Constructing scenarios

We have traced how the project is developing. We have conducted a survey of experts through a postal questionnaire and analysed the results. We hope that discussions at the seminar will help to develop an understanding of the basic trends and the key uncertainties, and explore how the uncertainties relate to one another. Thus, we are attempting to identify themes for building scenarios. This means taking continuity, turbulence and uncertainty into account.

The methodology developed in the Netherlands and elsewhere usually selects the two main, identified uncertainties as the poles for scenario building. This allows us to construct a grid with four scenarios. Possible variables for VET related contexts are suggested at the end of Section 1 and developed in Section 4 of this report.

Figure II: Scenario Construction

A1A2

B1

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

B2

Scenario 3

Scenario 4

We could refine and extend the model by building in ‘mid’ positions for factor X or Y. In any case, we will need to check the scenarios for plausibility and consistency. Could the scenarios develop in the timescale adopted? Do they take the most important uncertainties into account? Are they useful conceptually to researchers? Do they help policymakers to move beyond what several respondents have referred to as ‘short-termism’?

If the outcome of the research is successful, we would hope to see the scenarios thinking adopted, when appropriate, as a policy tool and as part of the frame of reference for deciding research and development priorities.

Three European methods for involving participants in policy formation

In public sector and government-led policy developments in the UK, public consultation normally follows the publication of a green or white paper, or some other consultation document. In France, while different kinds of consultation are commonplace, the ‘observatory’ is a mechanism that has developed to involve key stakeholders in policy decisions to tackle identified problems. In the Netherlands there is a growing interest in scenario building as a flexible tool for longer-term strategy development, encouraging clear but flexible visions of the future to assist policy formation. Each tool has its purposes, and each operates in a rather different way. Of course, they are not mutually exclusive. Each of the three methods is discussed below.

The UK

In the UK we are used to the publication of a consultation document in which the major thrust of policy development is already decided on, but where much of the detail and some of the key areas for decision have yet to be put in place. A good example of this is the current DfEE White Paper on the institutional structures for lifelong learning. Many of the fundamentals are already decided on as government policy. The decision to replace the Further Education Funding Council (FEFC) and Training and Enterprise Councils (TECs) with a Learning and Skills Council and to place the management of the development of lifelong learning on a regional basis has already been taken. Consequently, the consultation concerns important matters, but not the key policy decisions. Similarly, the DfEE’s recent green paper on reforming the teaching profession established the main thrust of policy for the payment, structure and performance management of the profession, and consulted on all the key details. Interestingly, this green paper attracted the largest response ever to a DfEE consultation exercise, and most of the respondents rejected at least one of the main tenets on which the policy is based. It is worth noting that public consultation in the UK over the past two decades has had a tendency to be built around what the government has seen as key necessities, rather than key uncertainties. A wide range of working and task groups (such as those set up in the DTI by the last government concerning the formation of engineers) undertake the preliminary work

France

For aspects of social policy, policy making involves the public authorities working closely with the social partners. A tool called the ‘observatory’ is often used to develop effective policies to tackle particular problems, such as high levels of unemployment among young people in a particular region. Two sets of ‘social actors’ are involved. At an early stage, officials and researchers assemble and present the full range of data and issues that relate to the whole policy area in question. Once the data are in place, the policy makers gather together in the observatory (actually or virtually) and, on the basis of the wide range of information and angles provided, consider a range of strategies and attempt to work out the most viable policy solutions to the identified problem. In the French system, and in the example given above, the social partners (notably, employers’ and employees’ representatives) are included as policy makers, and they have a shared role in managing issues of training and employment policy. The term ‘observatory’ is in common usage in France for the process outlined above and – while it lacks a certain resonance in English – the term does convey the methodology quite well. Because there are two main stages, the data gathering process is often referred to as ‘constructing the platform’ and the decision-making process involving the social partners as the work ‘in the observatory’.

The Netherlands

This report focuses on the construction of scenarios, and we have already attempted to summarise some of the key aspects. Both public and private sector organisations have developed scenario thinking in the Netherlands.

It may be illustrative to indicate briefly how scenarios are used to improve decision making by Royal Dutch Shell. Shell has been developing scenarios as part of its strategic thinking since the early 1970s to try to ensure that the organisation can adapt quickly and flexibly, as a major company in a fast-changing and unpredictable world. The company attempts to improve decision making by developing multiple scenarios against a background of possible future environments. This background includes the issues that concern the company most closely; it also includes elements in the environment that are fairly predictable, ‘trend breakers’ (whose outcome is unpredictable but whose dynamics can be understood) and, finally, potential major surprises.