The post-Soviet countries represent an interesting case for the study of various disciplines, as they have been undergoing a transition process for over 30 years, affecting most areas: politics, economy, culture and society. Vocational education, with its intersectional character, is also experiencing deep and fundamental changes.

Although reforms are inevitable under conditions of rapid technological change and globalization, even societies with relatively developed economies and education systems face challenges in reforming vocational education and training as the interests of stakeholders from all sectors are to be aligned. In countries where the market is underdeveloped and institutions are still unstable, these changes are even more complicated (Remington, 2017). The evolution of educational reforms in the post-socialist context is, therefore, difficult to predict (Silova & Ecklof, 2013).

After three decades of changes, vocational education in these countries is experiencing a steady decline in the number of VET students and consequently reduction of VET providing institutions, the number of universities and HEI students is on the contrary increasing. Governments trying to provide the economy with necessary skilled workers declare the implementation of reforms, however, the implementation of reforms is slow and hesitant (ETF, 2017). Considering the growing flow of skilled workers to the European Union and the substantial investments into vocational cooperation projects with the countries of the Eastern Partnership the studies of VET systems of these countries prove to have high relevance for the European dimension of research in VET.

This study aims to contribute to the research about reform processes in vocational education of the post-socialist Eastern European area by answering the question what are the possibilities and limits of the reform capacity of the Ukrainian VET system.

In political science, the concept of reform capacity is thematized as the ability to improve the status quo by identifying and implementing necessary changes ("reforms") (Brusis, 2008; Jäckle & Bauschke, 2009; Helms, 2009). The analytical approach to the study is institutionalism. Social institutionalism emphasizes that activities and changes cannot be viewed as outcomes of linear decision-making chains from the central to the local level (Møller & Skedsmo 2013), but rather as processes involving the interaction of cultural practices, where the relationship between institutions and individuals is assumed to be "highly interactive and mutually constitutive" (Hall & Taylor, 1996). Secondly, the analysis of the reform capacity of VET systems is based on the theory of path dependence brought into play by historical institutionalism. It emphasizes that the longer the system has been on a particular development path, the less likely fundamental changes are (Busemeyer & Vossiek, 2016). Moreover, decisions and the time at which they are made determine the extent of future developments (Pierson, 2000; Thelen, 2004). To complement the concept of the reform capacity of the VET system, the veto player approach is employed as well (Tsebelis, 2000). Applying the concept of reform capacity to the VET system from the perspective of institutionalism, the main theoretical assumptions are derived:

• The first assumption states that the implementation of reforms in a VET system depends on the degree of cultural affinity of the reforms (changes) introduced to the contexts and the actors in the system at the macro, meso, and micro levels.
• The second assumption concludes that the reform capacity of the VET system depends on the frequency, intensity and timing of changes imposed on the system.

These assumptions are systematically applied to the analysis of the case of the Ukrainian VET

The theoretical analysis is supported by the document analysis of primary and secondary sources. As the source of the primary information for the document analysis, the legal regulatory basis on vocational education in Ukraine from 1994 to 2021 was used. The technical reports of the international organisations active in the Ukrainian VET (period 1994-2021) are used as the secondary sources for document analysis.

The analysis confirms that the development of vocational education is strongly dependent on the Soviet legacy. In line with historical institutionalism, the stability of the Ukrainian system is predetermined by the 70 years submission to the economic, ideological and societal systems of the Soviet Union. As a result of the historical development, the last reference system has created counterpoints with the current environment that resulted in the accumulation of unresolved problems on the macro (governance), meso (vocational institutions) and micro (teaching-learning process and curricula) levels. During the revolutionary events of 2014 a so-called “windows of opportunities” was opened and a number of changes and reforms were introduced. The cooperation with the European Union and the European Training Foundations promoted the convergence of the education systems, including VET, with the global patterns (e.g. introduction of the National Qualification Framework). The Ukrainian VET system turned out to be a “laboratory of reforms”, however, the precarious economic situation and the norms and cultural patterns, which persist on the meta-cognitive level of the involved actors and that define vocational education as “the last resort”, potentially endanger the successful implementation of these reforms and decrease the reform capacity of the VET system.

Brusis, M. (2008). Reformfähigkeit messen? Konzeptionelle Überlegungen zu einem Reformfähigkeitsindex für OECD-Staaten. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 49(1), 92–113. Busemeyer, M. R. & Vossiek, J. (2016). Global Convergence or Path Dependency? Skill Formation Regimes in the Globalized Economy. In K. E. Mundy, A. Green, B. Lingard & A. Verger (Eds.), Handbook of Global Policy Series. The Handbook of Global Education Policy (Vol. 113, pp. 145–161). Wiley Blackwell. European Training Foundation. (2017). Torino Process 2016-17: Eastern Partnership and Russia. European Training Foundation. https://www.etf.europa.eu/en/publications-and-resources/publications/torino-process-2016-17-eastern-partnership-and-russia Hall, P. A. & Taylor, R. C. R. (1996). Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms. Political Studies, 44(5), 936–957. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb00343.x Helms, L. (2009). Wie entscheidungs- und reformfähig sind demokratische politische Systeme? Zeitschrift für Staats- und Europawissenschaften, 7(3-4), 622–641. https://doi.org/10.5771/1610-7780-2009-40271-622. Jäckle, S., & Bauschke, R. (2009). Lässt sich Reformfähigkeit messen? Eine kritische Würdigung der Sustainable Governance Indicators. ZPol Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft, 19(3), 359–386, URL: https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/10.5771/1430-6387-2009-3-359.pdf. Møller, J. & Skedsmo, G. (2013). Modernising Education: New Public Management Reform in the Norwegian education system. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 45(4), 336–353. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2013.822353. Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics. American Political Science Review, 94(02), 251–267. Remington, T. F. (2017). Business-government Cooperation in VET: a Russian Experiment with Dual Education. Post-Soviet Affairs, 33(4), 313–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586X.2017.1296730 Silova, I. & Eklof, B. (2013). Education in Eastern and Central Europe: Re-Thinking Post-Socialism in the Context of Globalisation. In R. F. Arnove, C. A. Torres & S. Franz (Eds.), Comparative Education: The Dialectic of the Global and the Local (pp. 403–444). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Thelen, K. (2004). Conclusions, Empirical and Theoretical. In K. A. Thelen (Ed.), Cambridge Studies in Comparative Politics. How Institutions Evolve: The Political Economy of Skills in Germany, Britain, the United States and Japan / Kathleen Thelen (pp. 278–296). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511790997.007 Tsebelis, G. (2000). Veto Players and Institutional Analysis. Governance, 13(4), 441–474. https://doi.org/10.1111/0952-1895.00141