Conference Agenda

Research into young people’s transitions to work and adulthood have provided important insights into the comparative impact of different forms of vocational education across Europe. Such comparisons have tended to centre on single points of transition within each jurisdiction, and especially on the balance of provision between schools and the workplace (Raffe 2014; Ryan 2001) and such contextual factors as the relationships between economies and welfare states in different countries (Walther et al. 2006). These national factors mediate the way that young people’s social origins and early life experiences shape their whole life-course, reflecting inequalities of class, ethnicity and gender (Ecclestone et al. 2010). However, these comparisons, salient in educational research, have generally been aggregated in largely quantitative and mixed-methods studies. Analysis of quantitative or mixed-methods data can capture some of the complexities of transition where the returns to different qualifications can be analysed (Cavaglia, McNally & Ventura, 2020; Dearden et al. 2000; Mcintosh & Morris 2021). These can indicate with some clarity the relative ease or difficult with which young people enter the workforce in different countries; but such approaches are less effective in showing how different national systems affect VET participants’ life prospects: not only their future productivity and promotions but their personal health, happiness and contributions to community and citizenship.

This paper by contrast reports a study that makes important contributions to understanding the changing nature of these processes in recent years. Firstly, it demonstrates how the forces that affect transitions shape the whole life-course by drawing on biographical accounts that are informed by reflections on participants’ lives. These accounts are taken from data collected for the international research project BioDataBase, a joint project of the the University of Applied Labour Studies, Germany, the University of Derby, UK and the University of Innsbruck, Austria, which is contributing transcribed biographies of vocational education students lives to an open, transnational repository of qualitative social science data. The project adopts a biographical and subject-oriented perspective that examine the dynamic interplay between structural conditions and individual agency, enabling individuals to actively construct their biographies within this context (Harney & Ebbert, 2006; Wengraf, 2001).

In this paper, we use data collected in England to show how changing patterns of transition and specific shifts in education policy are reflected in the autobiographical reconstructions and reflections of individuals. By locating participants’ extended transitions and trajectories not only within not only broader patterns of social and historical change but within changing education and skills policies, we seek to understand both national continuities and the dynamic nature of different national transition systems and processes through the multiple temporalities (Lingard, 2021) of participants’ lives and policy change. Whilst this approach locates our study within traditions of life history and other forms of research aiming to provide adequate representation of personal accounts within structural and historical context (Chase 2018; Goodson/Sikes 2001) and extends these traditions into the vocational sphere, it also draws on the multiple conceptualisations of policy change that affect contemporary accounts of policy research (Ozga, 2021; Warren, 2025). This approach enables us to go beyond established constructions of periodicity, that tend to align to governmental changes and avowed policy turns: instead, we note the different ways in which neoliberalism has unfolded over the vocational landscape of England during the last half-century and discover how these changes have played out in the lives of individual former vocational education students. We argue that these changes, compared to those in countries where VET has been generally (by no means entirely) stable over the last half-century, have a distinctive role in changing the whole life-course of individuals.

Context

The importance of skills for economic development and social cohesion is well recognised across countries. Equally well recognised is the role of public intervention in providing education services and developing skills. For illustration, public expenditure on education and training in the EU is among the largest categories of public spending, trailing only social protection, health, and broad economic governance. Private investment is also sizeable. With ageing populations in advanced and emerging economies, there is a persistent concern about sustaining growth to support living standards amid rising social and health expenditures. Ensuring growth – irrespective of the specific economic development and competitiveness strategy chosen – has direct implications for how skills demand evolves and, in turn, for the design of public skills policies.

Aim

This paper analyses and contrasts the design of skills policies in two different jurisdictions—the European Union and Singapore—through the lens of competitiveness paradigms. While the EU and Singapore differ in economic and political structures and in the level of policy intervention, they also embody distinct ways of competing that shape how skills policies are conceived and implemented. We hypothesise that the competitiveness paradigm adopted in each jurisdiction is a primary driver of skills policy design features.

Analytical Framing

We define the EU as a meta-level competitiveness and skills regime organised around a Single Market logic that promotes efficiency, innovation, and strategic transitions. This regime is articulated through EU-level strategies and instruments (e.g., the internal market acquis, the Green and Digital agendas, the Skills Agenda and European Education Area, and EU-wide coordination tools such as EQF, ESCO, Europass, and related data/standards initiatives). By contrast, Singapore’s competitiveness paradigm reflects a developmental state approach that prioritises high-value-added export competitiveness and the attraction of foreign direct investment, with skills policy embedded in global value-chain upgrading, continuous industry restructuring, and a strong emphasis on lifelong learning as the skills platform for rapid and continuous adjustment.

Theory and Mechanisms

Building on comparative political economy and policy design traditions, we link competitiveness paradigms to concrete mechanisms that shape skills policy design. Specifically, paradigms influence: (i) incentives and priorities (e.g., innovation, upgrading, inclusion); (ii) funding logic and risk-sharing across states, firms, and individuals; (iii) the mix of instruments (e.g., regulation and standards; subsidies and individual entitlements; provider quality assurance; data and recognition frameworks); (iv) governance levels and coordination (EU multi-level steering versus Singapore’s central strategic steering with social partner and sectoral roles); and (v) demand-side intervention and expectations on firms regarding skills utilisation and workplace transformation. These mechanisms provide an operational pathway from abstract paradigms to observable policy design choices.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of power dynamics in the Vocational Education and Training (VET) politics in Finnish and European contexts. Since Copenhagen process and during the 2000s, the main European guideline is to make VET systems converge and to enhance the single labor market in Europe (Bainbridge 2024). While there is no uniform European VET system or rules for VET policies in member states, since Copenhagen process, seemingly neutral and widely accepted concepts like learning outcomes and competences have dominated VET discussions and objectives. From the perspective of power politics, both concepts are seen as ways of expanding the hegemonic economical practices to the world of (vocational) education. With this move the power in defining the meaning, goals and the aims of education have shifted from educational expertise towards economic power (Antunes 2012; Kontio et. al. 2019).

While most actors within VET field agree upon some forms of competence-based education and emphasis on learning outcomes, both concepts have been criticized for too narrow view on learning and education (Rosenblad & Wheelalan 2025). Of course, in Europe, member states have different kinds of VET systems with different historical practices, which means that the way of implementing these European objectives defined in CP and other instances varies greatly (Ante 2016).
In this paper, we ask how the aforementioned concepts and European guidelines have shaped and are shaping Finnish VET politics and how does this show on power dynamics. The empirical focus of this paper is on our ongoing research project in which we have interviewed 17 key stakeholders in the Finnish VET field. Besides the interviews, we have analyzed key policy documents since latest VET reform, which was implemented by Juha Sipilä’s centre-right government between the years 2015 and 2018. In the reform, the Finnish VET system was transformed more deeply towards outcome-oriented and competence-based education. Objectives for new VET were personalized study paths for all, clearer connection with work-life, reduction of bureaucracy, efficiency, dismantling norms, and so on (Kontio 2019 et. al.). Since the big reform, VET politics have still been in turmoil, with almost pendulum-like swings. The centre-left government led by Antti Rinne (and later Sanna Marin) reversed some of the decisions made in the reform (as well as the budget cuts) and steered VET back towards a “welfare-state ethos” from the more “neoliberal” stances of Sipilä government. However, after the centre-left government the right-wing government of Petteri Orpo took power, which targeted heavy budget cuts to upper secondary VET, and reversed some of the decisions made by the Rinne/Marin governments.

Using Gramscian analysis of hegemony and power (cf. Mayo 2009) and how this is visible in the dynamics of key actors in the field of VET (cf. Kauko 2011) helps us form a comprehensive picture of contemporary challenges and flashpoints of VET politics. This presentation focuses on Finland but speaks to the wider European audience through analysing Finnish politics in conjunction with European concepts and trends.

VET at EU levels is shaped by supranational governance through policy instruments such as Erasmus+, Europass, the EQF, DigCompEdu, EQAVET etc. These instruments aim to promote mobility, transparency, quality and learning outcome orientation across and beyond national VET systems. For VET practitioners and organisations, however, engagement with European VET policy (EUVET policy) is often experienced as complex and only partially aligned with everyday professional practice.

In line with ECER’s 2026 theme ‘Knowing and Acting’, this contribution examines how EUVET policy knowledge is translated into VET practice. It conceptualizes EUVET instruments as governance tools that not only regulate systems but also shape professional knowledge, practices and identities in VET. Drawing on the understanding of policy instruments as ‘techniques of governing that help define and achieve policy goals’ (Bali et al., 2021), the paper focuses on the use of EUVET instruments by VET staff and providers.

The study is situated within VETNET debates on the relationship between policy, professional practice and learning in VET. It addresses the following research questions:

• How do VET teachers, trainers and providers perceive the relevance and usability of EUVET instruments in their professional practice?
• What challenges and tensions arise as regards the implementation of European VET policy at organizational and individual (professional) levels?
• How can educational research support the professional learning of VET staff and contribute to bridging European VET policy and local practice?

The paper argues that the implementation gap between EUVET policy and VET practice reflects broader changes in the conditions of knowledge production and use in education. In a context of multiple crises - economic, political, and societal - VET is increasingly expected to deliver policy-relevant outcomes, while practitioners face constraints of time, resources, and institutional priorities. As a result, knowledge about EUVET policy risks becoming instrumental or symbolic rather than a meaningful resource for professional development and organisational learning.

By combining empirical analysis with the development of practice-oriented learning units, the contribution positions VET research as a mediating element between European policy frameworks and local VET practice. This aligns with VETNET’s focus on strengthening the role of research in supporting vocational teachers, trainers and institutions in navigating through governance landscapes.