Reaching the marginalized: EFA global monitoring report, 2010; 2010

010CHAPTER 22Education for All Global Monitoring ReportIn mostcountries,governments,employers,trade unions,civil societyand privateagencies areinvolved in TVET18. ‘Tracking’ refers tothe practice of separatingstudents into differentschool types, typicallyacademic vs. vocational,at the scondary level.19. Decisions over thetracking of students areoften taken as early asage 10 to 12. The top tierof schooling – gymnasium– paves the way touniversity. Only 18% ofimmigrant children makeit to this top track,compared with 47% ofGerman students.Meanwhile, 40% ofimmigrant children attendthe lowest branch – twicethe share for studentsfrom German families.20. The Industrial andVocational Training Boardin Mauritius is oneexample. In Chile, theServicio Nacional deCapacitación y Empleo(SENCE) has no capacityfor delivering training butcontracts services froma range of public andprivate providers.educational achievement, with the schoolsystem actively reinforcing social and economicdivisions. 18 Germany has some of the largesteducation disparities between schools andsocio-economic groups in the OECD countries,with the children of immigrants far more likelyto be tracked into vocational education. 19School-based systems. Several countrieshave traditionally maintained a division of rolesbetween school-based general education andcompany-based training. In Japan, full-timevocational schooling is followed by full-timeemployment in enterprises linked to the school(OECD, 2009c). As with the German dual system,vocational training in Japan has historicallyhelped facilitate quick settlement of schoolleavers into secure employment. However,unlike in the German system, with its focuson firm-based training, in Japan studentsin vocational tracks typically leave full-timeeducation to enter companies that providetraining linked to their schools.Mixed models. Many countries operate hybridprogrammes, providing vocational educationstreams within the school system. This is acharacteristic of the French model, thoughFrance also operates a small parallel ‘dualsystem’ (Grubb, 2006). The United Kingdomoperates several ‘school and work’ programmesinvolving apprenticeships and general education(UK Learning and Skills Council National Office,2007). However, the links between employersand educators have traditionally been lessinstitutionalized than in the German orJapanese systems.In most countries, governments hold primaryresponsibility for setting the overall directionof vocational education policy and for overseeingand regulating standards. A wide range of otherinterested parties is involved, however, includingemployers, trade unions, civil society and privateagencies. Many countries have created nationaltraining authorities to oversee and coordinateactivities, with remits that extend from the designof vocational curricula in schools to oversightof training in specialized institutions and incompanies. Occupational and standard-settingbodies, along with national qualificationframeworks, seek to establish uniform andpredictable standards, enabling employersto assess potential employees’ skills.Beyond the school, there is a wide range of trainingproviders. In some cases, government agenciesplay the lead role in financing and providing trainingthrough specialized institutes. Other countries,such as Chile and Mauritius, have split financingfrom the provision of training and adopted acompetitive model for procuring training services. 20In some countries, the private sector occupies animportant position in both financing and providingtraining. The diversity of governance models isevident in Latin America (CINTERFOR/ILO, 2001;Gallart, 2008). In Colombia and Costa Rica, whichhave highly effective training models, the publicsector plays the dominant role in finance andprovision. By contrast, Brazil’s Serviço Nacionalde Aprendizagem Industrial (SENAI), one ofthe most successful vocational systems inthe developing world, is administered by theConfederação Nacional da Indústria (Box 2.11).Vocational education is costlyEvidence from developed and developing countriessuggests that technical and vocational educationis relatively costly to provide. In the fourteen OECDcountries for which data are available, expenditureper student is around 15% more than in generaleducation (OECD, 2008b). Evidence from sub-Saharan Africa suggests that vocational educationis up to fourteen times more expensive than generalsecondary education (Johanson and Adams, 2004).Public financing plays the central role in payingfor vocational provision through the secondaryschool system. In dual systems, training costs aretypically shared by governments and employers.For example, in Germany, companies coverapprenticeship costs while regional governmentspay for the school-based component (Ryan, 2001).Many governments mobilize private finance fornational training programmes through payroll taxeslevied on companies. Egypt’s Training Finance Fundis supported through a 1% levy on payroll taxes(DFID and World Bank, 2005). Twelve countriesin sub-Saharan Africa impose a similar levy, albeiton a far narrower tax base (Adams, 2007b).Companies play an importantand expanding roleThere is strong evidence that investment in trainingfor young people in the workplace is good for thecompanies involved, for individuals and for nationaleconomies. However, governments have to addressthe fact that workplace training is not always sharedfairly. Levels of investment in training tend to risewith the size of the company and the level of78