For a comprehensive theoretical review of vocational training, not only the subject has to be considered, but also its environment. Such a sociological approach has already been suggested by respected representatives of vocational training science such as Kell (2010, 1995), Kutscha (1990) and Zabeck (1980). Instruments such as Luhmann’s theory of social systems (2012, 1998a, 1998b, 1986) can be used for vocational training theory. The case examined here is such a project. At its core, it deals with the systemic design of the transition system, which has been criticized again and again (see e.g., Steib 2022; Euler 2010; Münk 2010; Krekel & Ulrich 2009; Baethge, Solga & Wieck 2007). If one understands this as an apparatus with which to deal with the large number of young school leavers who could not find an apprenticeship (see e.g., Friese 2011; Kutscha 2010; Beicht 2009; Euler & Severing 2006), then its function needs to be understood in terms of social justice and the welfare state (see e.g., Luhmann 2011). The planned contribution will examine in the light of Luhmann's system theory how the transitional system is constituted in relation(s) to the educational, economic and political system of society. To do this, not only the respective network of relationships, but also the function and logic (code and medium) inherent in the transitional system must be determined. Finally, based on these findings, it will be presented what possibilities there are to solve and "educate" the transitional system from its current one, primarily to the functional context of the welfare state. Although German vocational education and training is assumed to be relatively well-founded, the transition system has historically developed into a structure that was never intended, either in itself or in terms of its quantitative and qualitative design (Steib 2020).

Baethge, M.; Solga, H. & Wieck, M. (2007). Berufsbildung im Umbruch. Signale eines überfälligen Aufbruchs. In M. Baethge, H. Solga & M. Wieck (Eds.), Berufsbildung im Umbruch. Signale eines überfälligen Aufbruchs pp. 7–111. Berlin: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. Retrieved from: http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/stabsabteilung/04258/studie.pdf [09.03.2014]. Beicht, U. (2009). Verbesserung der Ausbildungschancen oder sinnlose Warteschleife? Zur Bedeutung und Wirksamkeit von Bildungsgängen am Übergang Schule – Berufsausbildung. BIBB-Report, 11, 1–12. Retrieved from: http://www.bibb.de/dokumente/pdf/a12_bibbreport_2009_11.pdf [02.10.2012]. Euler, D. (2010). Einfluss der demographischen Entwicklung auf das Übergangssystem und den Berufsausbildungsmarkt. Expertise im Auftrag der Bertelsmann Stiftung. St. Gallen: Bertelsmann Stiftung. Retrieved from: http://www.jugendsozialarbeit.de/media/raw/xcms_bst_dms_32525_32526_2.pdf [20.03.2014]. Euler, D. & Severing, E. (2006). Flexible Ausbildungswege in der Berufsausbildung. Nürnberg & St. Gallen. Retrieved from: http://www.bmbf.de/pub/Studie_Flexible_Ausbildungswege_in_der_Berufsbildung.pdf [02.10.2012]. Friese, M. (2011). Das Schulberufssystem: Restkategorie oder Innovationsfaktor der beruflichen Bildung? Berufsbildung, 65(131), 2–6. Kell, A. (1995). Das Berechtigungswesen zwischen Bildungs- und Beschäftigungssystem. In H. Blankertz, J. Derbolav, A. Kell & G. Kutscha (Eds.), Sekundarstufe II – Jugendbildung zwischen Schule und Beruf. Teil 1: Handbuch pp. 289–320. Stuttgart & Dresden: Klett. [Full list available on request]