The cedefop paper points out that:<\/p>\n

\u201cRelying upon the VET system to remedy emerging skill mismatches and better meet skill needs in the future is dependent upon ensuring that it is able to meet labour market needs, notably by making sure that its curriculum is up to date and that teaching and learning facilitate the transformation from intended to actually achieved learning outcomes.\u201d<\/p>\n

This sounds familiar too, doesn\u2019t it – as is the paper noting the need for effective pathways to further study as well as providing for effective workplace-based learning, especially in<\/p>\n

the guise of apprenticeships or providing more work experience to VET learners. A final and relevant comment is that \u201cwhile national stakeholders (including social partners) have a relatively large amount of influence over curriculum content, the [vocational education providers] need to have a degree of autonomy with respect to how those skills are delivered.\u201d VET providers (and the teachers and instructors involved) need to be able to \u201cenjoy a space for individual and local adjustment and innovation.\u201d This is where notions of \u2018compliance\u2019 can make things difficult if it is imposed too rigidly.<\/p>\n

Their final note in the executive summary for the paper is telling too in that the evidence from Europe largely points to VET curricula \u201cbecoming broader, in the sense that the general and vocational content encompasses a wider range of general (subject and transversal) content than hitherto.\u2019<\/p>\n

As it concludes:<\/p>\n

\u201cThis broadening has not weakened the distinctiveness of VET programmes; their occupational and labour market orientation is still strong, and to some extent strengthened through the increased priority given to apprenticeships and practice-based learning. These tendencies are accompanied by efforts to attribute more autonomy at local and regional level, facilitating the targeting of VET to individual and employer needs.\u201d<\/p>\n