Abstract

This study is drawn from findings from empirical studies of European and national policy documents supported by a literature review.  It explores the extent to which the Lisbon strategy influenced VET policy relating to young people in four European countries between 2000 and 2020 and traces the implications for this aspect of VET policy development in England and Scotland as those countries prepared for Brexit and left the European Union. 

Since the Lisbon strategy was launched by the European Union in 2000, vocational education and training (VET) policy has been portrayed in a variety of ways, in a series of declarations by VET ministers and subsequently by the Europe 2020 strategy.  The distinction between VET as initial VET or iVET (aimed at providing further and higher education, training and subsequently employment for those leaving school) or continuing VET or cVET (in the fields of adult education, lifelong learning and workforce development) is contrasted in the European statements and the policies in operation in the four countries.  For the purposes of this study I have chosen to explore iVET policy. 

I have examined the representations of iVET policy (Bacchi, 2009) through documentary analysis  of European policy documents and in a sample of policy documents from Denmark, England, Finland and Scotland between 2000 and 2020.  These four countries were selected because they presented educational, social, political and economic contrasts and also because of the nuanced relationships between England and Scotland both in terms of education policy and relationships with Europe (Keep, 2019). The operation of the European Semester since 2010 has provided insights into the influence of European Union policy making on national VET policies ( Alexiadou, Helgøy, & Homme, 2019; Brøgger, 2018; Stevenson, Hagger-Vaughan, Milner, & Winchip, 2017) and potentially, vice versa. 

This study takes a comparative, historical approach and draws out themes that have emerged during the period of study for critical discussion.  These findings are related to policy theories of convergence and divergence (Aarkrog & Jørgensen, 2008; Brøgger, 2018) and policy drift (Kay & Baines, 2017) and how these may relate to wider political trends.  Furthermore, the analysis brings out the impacts from the wider context of the global economic recession of 2008 and the subsequent changes of direction in relation to VET policy, for example, a greater emphasis on providing education and training for young people in order to mitigate the effects on societies and economies of youth unemployment (Valiente, Capsada-Munsech & de Otero, 2020), which is also of relevant to the post Covid-19 pandemic recovery. 

The theoretical framework for this study is based on policy scholarship, adapting approaches from policy archaeology/genealogy (Gale, 2001).  Policy development is considered from various stances (for example, Aarkrog & Jørgensen, 2008; Ball, 2015; Brøgger, 2018) to contribute to a model of policy evolution.

The questions relating to this study are:

1. To what extent have the Lisbon strategy declarations about VET influenced national iVET policies about young people in Denmark, England, Finland and Scotland?
2. What implications may these findings have for iVET policy development in England after Brexit and the COVID-19 pandemic?

Methods The study presents findings using a political discourse analysis framework (Fairclough & Fairclough, 2012) of European and national VET policy texts, carried out from the perspective of critical realism, thus seeking to explore meanings beneath statements made in the documents The framework facilitates an identification from the text of actions that need to be done by agents (as specified within the text, for example the European Union ministers for VET), described as ‘claims’ about a policy or policy change (in this instance) which are expected to promote policy ‘goals’ for a future (improved) state as outlined in the text. For example, a ‘claim’ made in the Helsinki communiqué (European Ministers for Vocational Education and Training, 2006) was: “a more systematic approach is needed to strengthen mutual learning, cooperative work and the sharing of experience and know-how.” This supports a ‘goal’ within the Helsinki communiqué (European Ministers for Vocational Education and Training, 2006) of: “The aim should be to promote a European VET area in which qualification and skills acquired in one country are recognised throughout Europe, thus supporting the mobility of young people and adults.” Also identified are the actions (or ‘means’) that will be used to achieve these ‘goals’, any alternatives to the policy ‘claims’ or ‘means’ (if alternatives are offered in the text), the context in which the policy change (or restatement) has arisen (for example natural or social factors that may need to be considered and to which the action is expected to provide a solution, (for example the global economic recession) and the ‘values’ that the owners of the text have identified as underpinning the actions they carry out to achieve the goal. These ‘claims’ are then viewed as problematisations as outlined by Bacchi (2009) to further analyse the discourses that lie below the surface of the policies outlined.

Conclusions The findings are expected to demonstrate different policy approaches to the ‘problem’ of youth unemployment, despite an overall ‘European’ approach (for example, the Youth Guarantee) and despite the particular focus on youth unemployment within the European Semester process after the recession in 2008 (Alexiadou et al., 2019; Jørgensen, 2016). The relationship between the policy ‘claims’ and ‘goals’ outlined in the Country Specific Recommendations of the Semester, compared with the National Reform Programmes submitted by the four countries and the policies outlined in national documents (Stevenson et al., 2017; Valiente, Lowden, & Capsada-Munsech, 2019) will be compared with theoretical approaches to policy convergence, divergence and policy drift (for example, Aarkrog & Jørgensen, 2008; Brøgger, 2018; Kay & Baines, 2017). These findings will contribute to illustrations of the complex nature of policy production and evolution (Ball, 2015; Hodgson & Spours, 2006) that cannot be perhaps captured by a simple cyclical representation. Building on the work of Stevenson et al. (2017) the study also aims to bring out the contrast between the European concept of ‘mobility’ and the ‘problem’ of post 16 NEETs where national policies have been designed with the appearance of equal opportunities but the inference may be drawn that the most disadvantaged young people will be directed to fill gaps in the labour market Arising from this, there may be evidence of different policy conceptualisations of the nature of iVET in the perception of the policy makers, for example, whether iVET can be located within an education ‘space’ (Grek et al., 2009) whether it is a vehicle for economic growth or whether it contributes to social goals. In particular, these findings will consider the trajectory of iVET policy development in both England and Scotland during preparations for Brexit and the opportunities for policy learning after the current pandemic.

References Aarkrog, V., & Jørgensen, C. H. (Eds.). (2008). Divergence and convergence in education and work (Vol. 6). Bern: Peter Lang AG. Alexiadou, N., Helgøy, I., & Homme, A. (2019). Lost in transition – policies to reduce early school leaving and encourage further studying in Europe. Comparative Education, 55(3), 297-307. Bacchi, C. (2009). Analysing Policy: What's the problem represented to be? Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Australia. Ball, S. J. (2015). What is policy? 21 years later: reflections on the possibilities of policy research. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 36(3), 306-313. Brøgger, K. (2018). How education standards gain hegemonic power and become international: The case of higher education and the Bologna Process. European Educational Research Journal, 00(0), 1-23. European Ministers for Vocational Education and Training. (2006). The Helsinki Communiqué on Enhanced European Cooperation in Vocational Education and Training. Helsinki: European Commission Fairclough, I., & Fairclough, N. (2012). Political Discourse Analysis. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Gale, T. (2001). Critical policy sociology: historiography, archaeology and genealogy as methods of policy analysis. Journal of Education Policy, 16(5), 379-393. Grek, S., Lawn, M., Lingard, B., Ozga, J., Rinne, R., Segerholm, C., & Simola, H. (2009). National policy brokering and the construction of the European Education Space in England, Sweden, Finland and Scotland. Comparative Education, 45(1), 5-21. Hodgson, A., & Spours, K. (2006). An analytical framework for policy engagement: the contested case of 14–19 reform in England. Journal of Education Policy, 21(6), 679-696. Jørgensen, C. H. (2016). Shifting problems and shifting policies to reduce student drop-out – the case of vocational education policy in Denmark. In S. Bohlinger, T. K. A. Dang, & M. Klatt (Eds.), Education policy : Mapping the landscape and scope. (pp. 325-349). Kay, A., & Baines, D. (2017). Evolutionary approaches to the concept of drift in policy studies. Critical Policy Studies, 13(2), 174-189. Keep, E. (2019). Parallel lines or divergent trajectories? A response to the other contributions. Journal of Education and Work, 32(3), 292-304. Stevenson, H., Hagger-Vaughan, L., Milner, A., & Winchip, E. (2017). Education and Training Policy in the European Semester Brussels:European Trade Union Committee for Education. Valiente, O., Capsada-Munsech, Q., & de Otero, J. P. G. (2020). Educationalisation of youth unemployment through lifelong learning policies in Europe. European Educational Research Journal. Valiente, O., Lowden, K., & Capsada-Munsech, Q. (2019). Lifelong learning policies for vulnerable young adults in post-recession Scotland. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 1-16.