vet vs general education in macedonia education policy perspective n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
VET vs general education in macedonia : Education policy perspective PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
VET vs general education in macedonia : Education policy perspective

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 14

VET vs general education in macedonia : Education policy perspective - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Download Presentation
VET vs general education in macedonia : Education policy perspective
An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. VET vs general education in macedonia:Education policy perspective “VET for social inclusion in the Western Balkans andTurkey: towards Regional Actions”, Torino, 12-13 December 2011 Prepared by: Prof. SuzanaBornarova PhD Institute for Social Work and Social Policy Faculty of Philosophy, Skopje, Macedonia

  2. VET system • Delivered through 173 VET programmes within 110 USS and 6 higher vocational schools (2 public; 4 private; 6 semesters) • VET available for 30 occupations • Qualifications: - I-st level: training for jobs with lower requirements (up to 2 years) - II-nd level: vocational training for occupation (3 years) - III-rd level: technical education (4 years) - IV-th level: postsecondary education and training

  3. Pupils/students in upper-secondary and higher vocational education Source: State Statistical Office

  4. General vs vocational education programmes in upper-secondary schools

  5. Share of pupils in upper-secondary education in 2001/2002 and 2009/2010

  6. USS according to language of instruction (2001/2002 and 2009/2010)

  7. Pupils in general and vocational secondary schools per gender 2009/2010

  8. Effective educational practices • Programmes overburdened with theory: - II-nd level qualifications: The general education takes up 50% of the three year vocational education, the vocational theory 30% and the practical training 20% • III-rd level qualifications: general education takes up 45% technical education, the vocational theory 35%, the practical training 10 % and elective instructions 10% (final+matura exam). • Low level of provision of work place training opportunities by businesses and firms

  9. Effective educational practices • Inclusiveness or segregation: • Heterogeneous per: gender, socio-economic status, rural/urban, ability • Homogeneous : in some cases per ethnicity • Family/community involvement: parental meetings/school boards/individual contacts; disengagement of parents; no impact on decision-making in school; no involvement in curriculum development or evaluation; no internet/phone communcation; no involvement of community members nor community education • Academic expectations (of students, teachers, families): low aspirations; no individualised help to stimmulate academic endeavors

  10. Effective educational practices • VET teaching: insufficient teacher training (traditional teaching methods, authoritarian relations with students/families); human resources; technical/financial resources; ex-catedra instead of interactive approach; low student participation • Strategies used by VET schools to reduce school failure and increase social cohesion in school neighbourhood and communities are nearly non-existent • Cooperative learning (no peer-mentors/peer learning groups) • Democratic values in curriculum: citizen’s education instead of cross-culturalism; multiculturalism • Diversity consideration: gender stereotyping

  11. VET status • Reserved for students with lower educational achievements • Attracts minority students • Less strict entry criteria and study requirements (high pass rates) • Stigmatisation (VET for poor/GE for elite/well-off) • Related to lower socio-economic status of students

  12. Labour market supply

  13. VET vs General education: Educational policy perspective • Education as ALTERNATIVE to social protection: Higher investments in education lower investments in social protection and vice versa! • Education as INSTRUMENT for prevention of social exclusion

  14. VET vs General education: Educational policy perspective