On Parity of Esteem between Vocational and General Academic Programs in Upper Secondary Education in Iceland

Abstract

In a European context, there has long been a discussion on the problem of parity of esteem between vocational education and training (VET) and general academic upper secondary education (see for example CEDEFOP, 2014; Lasonen & Young, 1998; Parkes, 1993). VET education does not enjoy the same status as general academic upper secondary education, which usually provides a pathway to higher education. The disparity of esteem between these two educational pathways reveals itself, for example, in differences in social standing, content taught, and the ability of students entering the programs. This, in turn, has consequences for social justice and future prospects of students (Nylund et al., 2018).

The disparity of esteem has been debated in Iceland for the better part of a century (Jón Torfi Jónasson, 1994). Despite regular declarations from various stakeholders of the need to strengthen VET, little has changed over the years. Jón Torfi Jónasson (1998a) identified the diverse forces working against VET at the upper secondary level in Iceland, some including the very stakeholders vowing support. There have been several attempts to address the apparent parity divide, showing a variety of very deliberate attempts to de-institutionalize the divide between vocational and academic tracks. The most recent examples are the educational reform in Iceland in 2008 and a curriculum overhaul in 2011 (lög um framhaldsskóla [Upper Secondary Education Act] nr. 92/2008; Mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneytið [Ministry of Education, Science and Culture], 2012). A white paper on education reform (Menntaog menningarmálaráðuneytið [Ministry of Education, Science and Culture], 2014), also presented a clear policy directive to enhance the status of vocational education. Despite these efforts, a disparity in esteem between vocational and general academic pathways seems evident and the resilience of the issue begs further investigation.

The aim of the paper is to explore the disparity between vocational and academic programs in contemporary upper secondary education in Iceland from three perspectives: 1) External forces with a focus on educational policy documents, as well as the impact of the university level and the world of work. 2) The setting of upper secondary education and what influences students’ choice of upper secondary education. 3) Teaching practices and teacher experiences as compared across these two pathways at upper secondary schools. Considering these three different perspectives provides us with a cross-sectional view of how the disparity potentially reveals itself.

In our analysis we draw upon different sources of data. We used various public documents, including the Act for the upper secondary school level (lög um framhaldsskóla [Upper Secondary Education Act] nr. 92/2008) and the National Curriculum Guide (Mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneytið [Ministry of Education, Science and Culture], 2012). Additionally, we used upper secondary school websites to gauge different admission requirements, as well as examining data from Statistics Iceland. We also used interview data and classroom observations from a comprehensive study conducted in nine upper secondary schools in Iceland between 2013 and 2014 (Gerður G. Óskarsdóttir og rannsóknarhópurinn, 2018). The nine upper secondary schools were selected on the basis of stratified sampling. Here, we used data from 115 classroom observations, interviews with 21 school leaders and 22 teachers to compare teaching practices and analyze participants’ perception on the impact of different social structures and stakeholders on these two educational pathways.

Our findings show that a disparity between vocational and general academic upper secondary education still exists in Iceland. The parity of esteem issue reveals itself in various ways across the three different perspectives considered. The status of the subjects belonging to vocational education, on the one hand, and general academic education, on the other, is seen to differ when consulting the National Curriculum Guide (Mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneytið [Ministry of Education, Science and Culture], 2012) and the Upper Secondary Education Act (lög um framhaldsskóla) No. 92/2008. The Guide and the Act are silent about individual vocational subjects, while the core subjects, English, mathematics, and Icelandic, are almost exclusively discussed in both public papers. The disparity is, inter alia, inherent in the admission requirements of upper secondary schools. Students enrolling in VET pathways are not required to have as high grades at the end of compulsory education as students enrolling in general academic pathways. In addition, entry requirements are almost exclusively based on academic competences and traditions. The teaching practices and classroom work varied in important ways between the observed VET classes and the more general academic classes. Individualized teaching practices were more common within the VET classes and group work more frequently used in the general academic classes. The VET classes were also of longer duration. The interviews with teachers revealed deep-seated differences in the status of VET and general academic programs, demonstrating that VET teachers generally have the challenge of teaching a more diverse student group, in terms of academic ability, learning disabilities, and age.

Hence, the overall results show that academic trends dominate the system of upper secondary education in Iceland, undermining the status of vocational education. The findings give rise to complex questions on social justice in education, the need to discuss the aims of education, and how a controlling conservative attitude permeates the education system, even though public policy preaches the opposite.