This document provides a historical analysis of factors that have influenced British vocational education and training policy over the last 30 years. It discusses how the system has been characterized by constant turbulence and reform by successive governments from different political perspectives. There has been an ongoing debate between the emphasis on education versus training, and a failure to embrace both. This has contributed to the system struggling to meet national skills expectations or industry demand. The roles and relationships between government, employers, unions and education providers have also shifted over time due to changing political ideologies.

1. 1 | P a g e
Britain - “Strong on
training; weak on
education”
The turbulence that has characterised British
education and training is one that continues
to challenge both political, economic and
social policy while ongoing reform from
successive governments of diverse political
persuasions seem to be motivated by
entrenched ideology and economic
positioning in an increasingly competitive
global environment. Education and training in
Britain has been the subject of ongoing policy
and economic reform agendas. Raffe (2015)
with a sense of conceded Déjà vu heralded
further intervention in the country’s
vocational system which he advocates is
beyond remedial intervention and in need of
significant and politically contentious reform.
A succession of reviews have failed to provide
any real clarity concluding that there has been
an ongoing devaluation of the apprenticeship
system (Richard, 2012), failure of the
education system for 14–19 year olds to
retain and educate the future workforce
(Wolf, 2011) and failure to capture industry
confidence in the training provided
(Whitehead, 2013). The inference is that there
is a growing chasm existing between the
esteem of education and mediocracy of
training. What is advocated in this analysis is
that education implies training just as training
inherently depends upon education. In Britain
what has unfolded is the bastardisation of a
system that clings onto class ideology and the
virtue of a compulsory education system that
struggles to excel while maintaining a level of
judicious insincerity towards the mediocracy
of vocational training. The question is not
about strength and weakness but abysmal
failure of government and all levels of
education and training to meet their social
obligations.
While the focus of this paper is a historical
analysis of factors that have influenced British
vocational education and training, the
position that will be presented questions not
the dominance of training embedded within
government rhetoric as opposed to
compulsory education but the failure to
embrace the virtues of both. Political ideology
has dominated the education and training
debate while leaving the socially disaffected
and economically disenfranchised in its wake.
What is proposed is a time for a reawakening
and acknowledgement that training and
education is not a social divide but an
integrated learning continuum.
The post war Keynsian ideals dominated by
centralist social and economic policy were
typified a regime identified with old
democracy, and destined to become a
political enigma. Globalisation and with it the
political frenzy generated by increased
competition and subsequent demand for an
increasingly more skilled workforce paved the

2. 2 | P a g e
way for neo-liberalism and its emphasis on
market demand based policy. Hodgson and
Spours (2013) in their analysis of British post
Conservative social and education reforms
suggest a moderate and enlightened ‘Third
Way’ alternative which places the role of the
state as pivotal to sustained investment in
social capital inspired education reform. It is
however from a historical perspective that
some semblance of the years of constant
upheaval can gain some rational
understanding.
The ‘New Labour’ Blair government was
elected in 1997 in a landslide, ending eighteen
years of Conservative Thatcher – Major
governments and crippling austerity that had
disenfranchised swathes of the British
electorate. New Labour reflected a
fundamental shift in entrenched Labour
philosophy though still retained residual
elements of a centralist, and perceived
conservative inspired education policy. Its
intent however was to raise the standard of
compulsory education which had received
sustained criticism from a suite of economic
surveys and education outlook reports
conducted by the OECD from 2005 to the
present (OECD, 2005), (OECD, 2011), (OECD
2015). The false hope was in a government
that maintained a less emphatic approach to
post-compulsory education and training
which Hodgson and Spours (2013) suggest
was in part a question of priorities and being
politically prudent in recognition that
quantum change was domestically
problematic.
Pring et al. (2012) present an alternative view
in terms of government intervention and
argue that the reformist policy commenced
under the former Conservative governments
and later pursued by Labour, had become
increasingly more centralised and controlling
in both the actions it took and the language it
used. For almost thirty years the training and
education dichotomy that has been
perpetuated and beleaguered the British
education system has been fuelled by ongoing
academic and political debate has tended to
polarise views rather than establish a lasting
consensus. Charged political rhetoric and
unencumbered academic discourse continue
to fuel the division between the arguably
inseparable virtues that maintain the
incongruous divide between education and
training
There was growing evidence from OECD
reports that economic development across
the United Kingdom was at risk of stagnating
unless there was a concerted investment
effort in the development of a skilled labour
force (OECD, 2005). The nation’s vulnerability
was specifically directed at the decline of
vocational qualifications and the skills that
would drive the economic transformation and
capacity to compete on the world stage. The
challenge now facing government was not just
one of supply and demand. The issue of

3. 3 | P a g e
quality of the vocational skills being delivered
in conjunction with the depth of technical
content was to become the justification for an
overhaul of the National Education
Framework (Hayward 2004). The relative
inertia in vocational skill development was
attributed to a complexity of interrelated and
historically entrenched factors. The low
esteem and deficit provision status (Unwin,
2004) associated with vocational
qualifications along with declining levels of
satisfaction from employers as to the quality
of training (Braconier, 2012; Winch, 2012) was
a persistent and ongoing impediment to
reversing declining post compulsory
education student retention.
Britain’s education and training policy
attempted to maintain a synergy between
social rhetoric and economic pragmatism
though Huddleston and Oh (2004) were more
forthcoming in their analysis and portrayed
governments bent on transferring the
consequence of economic austerity upon an
education system portrayed to be incapable
of meeting national skills expectations and
industry demand. With the defeat of the
Labour government in 2010 the nation was to
embark on a new education direction under
the new Cameron lead Coalition government.
The previous Labour government had been
criticised for building an education platform
based around credentialism rather than
strategic skills development (Fuller & Unwin,
2011). Fuller and Unwin (2011) in their
critique of the path the newly elected
Coalition government armed with the
recommendations from the recently
published Wolf Report embarked on yet
another reformist agenda. The new rhetoric
was one of apprenticeship and a romantic
attachment to the age of crafts and guilds.
The political ground nonetheless was shifting
and economic imperatives were diverting
attention from enduring and systemic
educational challenges in favour of the
perceived of benefits from an increasingly
more skilled labour force.
Change for change sake
It is from this historical perspective that elicits
a contextual appreciation of the turbulence
and mercurial nature of education policy that
has typified successive government policy
over the last thirty years. The implementation
of the National Vocational Qualifications
(NVQs) in 1987 was an attempt to nationalise
qualifications across the United Kingdom
under the umbrella of the National
Qualifications Framework (NQF), (Young,
2011). Progression from lower secondary
education and fulfilment of Key Stage 4 was
through the completion of the General
Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE)
examination. Upper secondary education
presented distinct and later culturally
embedded pathways that reinforced the
distinction and inevitable stratification of
students based upon tracked academic and
vocational aspirations. Opportunities however

4. 4 | P a g e
were available for students who wanted to
pursue an apprenticeship under a higher NQF
Level 3 vocational pathway though the
Business and Technology Education Council
(BTEC) qualification that was awarded
received only moderate uptake (OECD, 2011).
Huddleston and Oh (2004) in their historical
critique of government education policy
maintain that successive governments sought
political refuge from the collapse of the youth
labour market by linking perceived failure of
the education system with broader economic
and social decline. Hayward and Fernandez
(2004) similarly question the role of the state
and its interventionist policy and constant
correction of perceived market failures.
Higham and Yeomans (2011) in their analysis
of 14-19 year old education in Britain identify
the implementation of the Technical and
Vocational Education Initiative (TVEI) in 1982
by the Thatcher government as the policy
touch point that initiated the ongoing reform
that continues to fuel debate. The significance
of the TVEI was that for the first time
government policy was focusing specifically
on 14-19 education. Secondly, the TVEI while
a government initiative maintained arm’s
length from the control of Whitehall and
operated through the quango Manpower
Services Commission (MSC). Neither TVEI nor
MSC focused much attention on 17—19 year
olds, diverting most of their strategic direction
on the curriculum of the 14-16 year old
cohort. Though MSC maintained its
controversial presence, it was not until 2002
that the Department of Education and Science
(DES) and the implementation of a national
curriculum that control of education policy
was centralised.
The NVQ experiment
The National Vocational Qualifications (NVQs)
introduced in 1988 were qualifications
developed around a competency based
system that encapsulated the occupations
and associated skills across industry. Though
their intent was to provide recognition of the
existing skills of the workforce they have
sustained heated criticism and ridicule. Cox
attributed the negativity directed towards the
NVQs around three failings; ‘content’,
‘outcomes’ and ‘process’ (Cox, 2007). Young
(2011) however presented an alternate view,
suggesting that the NVQ and the negativity it
attracted was nothing more than the
commodification of vocational education.
The British vocational system has endured
ongoing criticism for its failure to meet the
needs of its youth with ‘churning’ between
education and employment due to the lack of
permanent employment (Wolf, 2011). The
casualisation of employment and churning
between government welfare and
employment was a phenomenon that proved
problematic for the government and those
most vulnerable (Worth, 2005).
The declining lack of vocational relevance of
the education system has contributed to
substantial analysis and constant policy shifts
over the last thirty years (Huddleston & Oh,
2004). Central to gaining some semblance of

5. 5 | P a g e
an understanding of what has driven
vocational policy throughout the United
Kingdom is some coherence within the
rhetoric that is associated with VET
(Vocational Education and Training). In
essence, it is the inextricable link that defines
not just what equates to a vocational
outcome but how education and training have
defining, though historically not equal roles, in
the provision of a skilled workforce. The
fervour generated from education league
tables such as TIMSS, PIRLS, IALS, and PISA
highlight dependence attributed to the
dependence attributed to the statistical
validity and robust analysis of the data
(Bonnet, 2002). It was however the emphasis
on high stakes testing regime which was the
backbone of the GCSE that had a negative
impact by becoming the driver of education
reform rather than the measure of its success
(OECD, 2011).
Higher education in particular has maintained
robust debate within successive governments,
industry and education providers. Johnson
(2004) in his analysis of education policy in
England identifies student retention, class
division and subsequent stratification of
education along socioeconomic divides and
the apparent disconnect between training
provision and quality of the skills attained.
Winch (2012) in his analysis of the British
vocational system reinforces the fundamental
failure of past reforms in the narrow
instrumentalist interpretation that has
dominated. It is his view that the emphasis
across VET has predominantly concentrated
on the narrow acquisition of defined skills
rather than the broader educational
attainment that are attributed to accepted
civic and social norms. The fervour of
government to reverse the skill decline and
later Wolf (2011) attributed in part to the
diminished public acceptance of vocational
qualifications is in contrast to analysis
presented by Hayward and Fernandez (2004).
Wolf’s review of the vocational education in
Britain in many ways brought the failure of
the education and training system to the
forefront of the nation’s political agenda. Her
review enunciated in unequivocal terms that
vocational education in its present forms for
almost a quarter of post 16 year olds was
contributing to the perpetuation of low level
qualifications in areas where future
employment prospects were limited.
Hayward and Fernandez (2004) however
contend that the demand for generic skills
that prepared young people for a life of work
was supported by employers however
government inability to implement new policy
and global economic externalities were seen
as the real impediments to success.
The role of the state as the provider or
facilitator of training and skills shifted in line
with 1960 neoliberal policy that dominated
British politics and until recently continued to
influence education and training. In Foreman-
Pecks (2004) historical analysis of British

6. 6 | P a g e
vocational education and training the role of
education was measured In terms of
economic return. The concept of human
capital theory and consumption based
economics focused the role of VET as a
vehicle to ensure the skills demanded by
industry were delivered and with it a
workforce that was equipped to service the
demand. The realignment that took place was
not a question of how the state would deliver
the skills needs of industry but as Worth
(2005) states it is also how employers are to
make a greater contribution towards skills
provision in areas of demand.
The British education system has been slowly
transformed having had its relative
independence eroded through neo-liberal,
market dominated policy. Gleeson and Keep
(2004) see education’s marginalisation as
symptomatic of neo-liberal reforms that
progressively transferred obligations once
supported by the state to an expectation that
the burden of skills provision will be carried
by the individual. Tension between employers
and the state were inevitable as demand for
skills by industry was a commitment that
government was progressively relinquishing
direct control in favour of free markets and
mutual obligation. In essence, Gleeson and
Keep argue that education and training has
been inadvertently excised from its historical
connection with industry and placed firmly in
the control of the state and education
providers. Foreman-Peck (2004) in his analysis
of neo-liberal reform was far more succinct in
his commentary and related the ideological
shift from state controlled education to a
demand driven system determined by the
immediate needs of industry. The concept as
outlined by Foreman-Peck (2004) of
‘spontaneous order’ relies on an idealistic
notion that a skills equilibrium supported by
the sustained faith and collaboration between
industry, unions and the workforce would
supply the quality and volume of vocational
skills required. The policy anachronism that
was being perpetuated was seen one that
intended to give employers greater control of
training direction but over time inadvertently
isolated employers and industry who were
unconvinced that it was and should remain a
function of government. It is argued that only
through by imposing training levees on
industry or incentives for small business will
there be a positive uptake to meet skills
demand (Stanton & Bailey, 2005). Vocational
education policy in particular was becoming
increasingly driven by ideological rhetoric that
stressed social inclusiveness and global
competitiveness as the rationale for change.
The language from government was shifting
from education as a social good to one that
reinforced the attainment of skills, social
capital and productivity (Pring et al., 2012).
The consequence of vocational education and
training becoming a de facto retention
strategy for otherwise disengaged youth is
that the very vehicle portrayed by

7. 7 | P a g e
governments as liberating people from
disadvantage can potentially further alienate
those it is intended to assist. Fuller and Unwin
(2011) refer to a conscious shift from what
they refer to as ‘traditional pedagogy’ where
to one of ‘practical pedagogy’. The divergence
is one that reinforces conservative attitudes
and risks entrenching a regime of social
stratification based on the division between
academic ideals and perceived lower level
practical learning. Meanwhile successive
British governments have espoused the
economic virtues of a skilled workforce
however Fuller and Unwin (2011) suggest that
this represents nothing more than a thinly
veiled political strategy to manage economic
imperatives.
In support of their argument was the Coalition
Government’s response to youth
unemployment, particularly the 14-19 year
old cohort where raising participation rates in
schools was to be the panacea of successive
and critical OECD economic reports. The
severity of the problems confronting Britain
were flagged in 2005 where the attainment of
formal qualifications across the workforce
were well below the OECD average and basic
literacy and numeracy skills had fallen far
short of expectations (OECD, 2005). While at
the time the notion of raising the compulsory
education age beyond 16 was considered
‘draconian’ (OECD, 2005) the economic
significance of an education system that was
failing becomes evident in the government’s
intention to raise compulsory schooling to 18
years (OECD, 2011). Increased education
spending was no more than a desperate
attempt to turn the nations flagging
education system however PISA scores
remained unchanged and the socioeconomic
divide continues to disenfranchise the most
disadvantaged in the community (OECD,
2015).
Michael Gove as the then Secretary of State
for Education addressed the persistently high
levels of youth unemployment and industry’s
reluctance to embrace the need for skilled
labour by attempting to restore the status of
crafts and underlying apprenticeships (Fuller
& Unwin, 2011). Richard (2012) similarly
argued for raising the status of
apprenticeships that had in his view suffered
from progressive devaluation and diminished
industry confidence. Braconier (2012)
similarly questioned the declining public
perception and industry’s diminished
confidence in the apprenticeship system
though acknowledged public perception
remained resolute with some apprenticeships
while employers became increasingly
confused with the ongoing changes. Raffe
(2015) however questions not just the failure
of education or training but argues it is a
systemic policy failure of education and
governments misguided and ideologically
motivated attempts to fix a system seen as
broken. His pragmatic analysis encapsulates
failure on two levels; that of vocational

8. 8 | P a g e
qualifications to meet the demand for
technical skills and an education system
failing to deliver the breadth of learning that
underpinning skills demanded by industry.
Foreman-Peck (2004) provides some insight
into one interpretation that defines
Vocational Education and Training (VET)
compared with what he defines as ‘liberal
education’ philosophy built on consumption
with minimal economic return. In many ways
this dichotomy of views distinguishes the
underpinning philosophy that distinguishes
VET in Foreman-Pecks analysis of the German
and English systems. The notion that market
forces can determine the direction of British
VET supports a view that VET policy in Britain
is reactive to external forces or as Foreman-
Peck describes as modelled on ‘spontaneous
disorder’. This philosophy underpins the
neoliberal principles that market forces will
ultimately determine social and economic
trajectories based on the fundamental
principles of supply and demand. The
converse position, ‘spontaneous order’ is
predicated on industry, trade unions and
workers establish some consensus in which
access and provision of quality training is
attained.
The training panacea
While the NVQs were an attempt to bring
together qualifications under the one national
umbrella, vocational training maintained its
‘Cinderella status’ (Lingfield, 2012), (Unwin,
2004). Lingfield’s review of Further Education
(FE) was commissioned at a time when there
was declining public confidence in the FE
sector and its capacity to address the alarming
deficiencies that were being exposed. It was
the 16-18 year old cohort that his review and
the previous Wolf (2011) review that exposed
the systemic failures that from the
government’s perspective were contributing
to persistent youth unemployment and
threatening the nation’s capacity to complete
globally. Attribution of the school system’s
failure as highlighted by Lingfield in terms of
levels of functional illiteracy and innumeracy
of students aged 16-18 exiting the school
system and channelled into vocationally
oriented FE streams was evidence of a policy
leitmotif built on remediation rather that
addressing the root of the problem. The
vocational function of FE was being subverted
from its role as the provider of education and
skills demanded by industry to one that was
pragmatic in response though superficial in its
intent.
The Education and Training
Divide
The delineation between education and
training has in part contributed and further
entrenched the view that the pedagogic
principles supporting each are discrete and
incongruous. Lucas, Claxton and Webster
(2010) endeavour to progress the debate
beyond an otherwise divisive critique to an
epistemological analysis of education,
learning and training and its implementation

9. 9 | P a g e
in the curriculum of 14-19 year olds. Their
analysis of ‘Practical and Vocational
Education’ (PVE) and distinction with
‘Practical Vocational Learning’ (PVL) suggest
that it is not the conflict of training and
education that is in question. They maintain
that there is confusion inherent in the use and
understanding of the word ‘education’ which
refers to what governments provide.
‘Learning’ however expands beyond the realm
of service provision associated with education
to one that reinforces observation,
application and questioning to assist in
understanding. ‘Training’ as with education is
concerned with the acquisition of skills
though generally within a workplace context
and an applied learning strategy that
effectively imparts the desired outcomes.
Winch (2012) continues to support arguments
presented in earlier papers that the
connotations of simplicity of tasks and
diminished educational attainment is being
perpetuated within the perverse separation of
education and training. Education however is
the underpinning support that facilitates the
learning rather than the antithesis of training.
Pring et al. (2012) presents an alternate and
‘tripartite’ perspective that differentiates
young people as either academic, vocational
or those that fall outside the education and
social support mechanisms. Their view is that
this stratification of education attainment and
subsequent stigmatisation of graduates is a
problem that has challenged former
governments and continues to impact on
current policy initiatives.
The foundation that cements the ongoing
debate between education and training as
argued by Winch (1995) emanates from the
philosophy espoused within Rousseau’s Emile
and the philosophical principles that at the
time challenged the virtues of education and
training (Rousseau, 1762). Winch (1995)
however questions the negativity associated
with training as a form of conditioning as
opposed to the Rousseauan principles
established around experiential learning.
Winch (1995) however acknowledges that the
negativity often attributed to training is the
inference that it is a mutually negotiated
submissiveness in which knowledge is
imparted and learning transpires. Though
Winch (1995) suggests that even within
Rousseau’s treatise there is a level of
contrivance and contradiction it does
reinforce the philosophy behind what Lucas,
Claxton and Webster (2010) were presenting
in their emphasis on learning and education
being practical and vocational. There is
however an alternate view that suggests
government attempts to address the
hierarchical inequality between academic and
vocational training by blurring the divide in an
illusory joining of the two. Stanton and Bailey
(2005) however questions the value of such
policy and argues that such unification only
further clouds the distinct pathways. The
irony is further highlighted through example

10. 10 | P a g e
of public perceptions of what delineates an
academic or vocational pathway. The
vocational construct being one that relates to
skills of the hand as opposed to the mind
(Lucas, Claxton & Webster, (2010) raises a
conundrum with disciplines such as medicine
or engineering securely in the academic camp
though undeniably a vocational pursuit by
definition (Stanton & Bailey, 2005).
United we stand…
The premise from the title of this paper
implies that education reform in Britain has
sustained relentless imbalance between
education and training. The problems that
have hampered this quasi territorial debate
has been the compartmentalisation of the
education systems rather than a holistic
approach that sees compulsory education,
vocational and higher education as integrated
pathways. The consequence has been a
disjointed system that has failed at all levels
as well as in terms of a raft of social,
economic and quality indicators.
The question therefore on ‘strength’ and
‘weakness’ highlights the political
equivocation that has dominated and
ultimately contributed to failure at all level.
Stagnating education benchmarks as reported
by the OECD have fuelled reactive responses
from governments and added to the
confusion and lack of clear direction. The
dependence on high stakes testing, flagging
literacy and numeracy outcomes,
marginalisation of those socially
disadvantaged and skills shortage in emerging
technologies typify the challenges being
faced.
The social stratification reflects the education
divides that persist and continue to be
entrenched within a policy vacuum that
perpetuates delineated and disconnected
education tracks. Raffe (2015) presents a
more conciliatory and constructive approach
asserting that it is not the Qualifications
Framework which is the problem but the
education system as a whole. The notion of
what he refers to as a ‘divided system’
epitomises what has become policy without
substance. What is evident is a nation weak
on education; weak on training.

11. 11 | P a g e
References
Bonnet, G. (2002). Reflections in a Critical Eye:
On the pitfalls of international assessment.
Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy &
Practice, 9(3), 387-399. doi:
10.1080/0969594022000027690a
Braconier, H. (2012). Reforming Education in
England: OECD Publishing.
Cox, A. (2007). Re-visiting the NVQ Debate:
‘Bad’ Qualifications, Expansive Learning
Environments and Prospects for Upskilling
Workers. SKOPE Research Paper No 71.
University of Manchester.
Foreman-Peck, J. (2004). Spontaneous
Disorder? A Very Short History of British
Vocational Education and Training, 1563-
1973. Policy Futures in Education, 2(1), 72-
101.
Fuller, A., & Unwin, L. (2011). Vocational
education and training in the spotlight: back
to the future for the UK’s Coalition
Government? London Review of Education,
9(2), 191-204. doi:
10.1080/14748460.2011.585879
Gleeson, D., & Keep, E. (2004). Voice without
accountability: the changing relationship
between employers, the state and education
in England. Oxford Review of Education,
30(1), 37-63. doi:
10.1080/0305498042000190050
Hayward, G, (2005). Vocationalism and the
decline of vocational learning: a warning from
England. OVAL Research, Broadway. paper
presented at the 4th International Conference
on Researching Work and Learning.
Hayward, G., & Fernandez, R. M. (2004). From
core skills to key skills: fast forward or back to
the future? Oxford Review of Education,
30(1), 117-145. doi:
10.1080/0305498042000190087
Higham, J., & Yeomans, D. (2011). Thirty years
of 14-19 education and training in England:
reflections on policy, curriculum and
organisation. London Review of Education,
9(2), 217-230. doi:
10.1080/14748460.2011.585883
Hodgson, A., & Spours, K. (2013). New
Labour's New Educational Agenda: Issues and
Policies for Education and Training at 14+ (pp.
177). Retrieved from
http://UNIMELB.eblib.com.au/patron/FullRec
ord.aspx?p=1166527
Huddleston, P., & Oh, S. (2004). The magic
roundabout: work-related learning within the
14-19 curriculum. Oxford Review of
Education, 30(1), 83-103.
doi:10.1080/0305498042000190096
Johnson, P. (2004). Education policy in
England. Oxford Review of Economic Policy,
20(2), 173-197. doi: 10.1093/oxrep/grh010
Lingfield, R. (2012). Professionalism in Further
Education: Final report of the independent
review panel (pp 52). (12/1198). London.
Lucas, B., Claxton, G., & Webster, R. (2010).
Mind the Gap: Research and reality in
practical and vocational education (pp. 94).
Edge Foundation, London.
Moser, C. (1999). Improving Literacy and
Numeracy: A Fresh Start, Department for
Education and Employment, London.
OECD. (2015). OECD Economic Surveys: United
Kingdom 2015. In OECD Economic Surveys.
OECD. (2011). OECD Economic Surveys: United
Kingdom 2011. In OECD Economic Surveys.
OECD. (2005). OECD Economic Surveys: United
Kingdom 2005 (Vol. 2005): OECD Publishing.
Pring, R., Hayward, G., Hodgson, A., Johnson,
J., Keep, E., Oancea, A., Wilde, S. (2012).

12. 12 | P a g e
Education for All : The Future of Education and
Training for 14-19 Year-Olds Retrieved from
http://UNIMELB.eblib.com.au/patron/FullRec
ord.aspx?p=1020216
Raffe, D. (2015). First count to five: some
principles for the reform of vocational
qualifications in England. Journal of Education
and Work, 28(2), 147-164. doi:
10.1080/13639080.2014.1001334
Richard, D. (2012) The Richard Review of
Apprenticeships. London.
Rousseau, J. J. (2009). Émile Concerning
Education; Extracts (E. Worthington, Trans. J.
Steeg Ed.). First published 1762.
Stanton, G., & Bailey, B. (2005). In search of
VET. Research Paper 62. Oxford and Warwick
Universities. London.
Unwin, L. (2004). Growing beans with
Thoreau: rescuing skills and vocational
education from the UK's deficit approach.
Oxford Review of Education, 30(1), 147-160.
doi: 10.1080/0305498042000190104
Whitehead, N. (2013). Review of Adult
Vocational Qualifications in England (pp. 43).
United Kingdom: UK Commission for
Employment and Skills.
Winch, C. (2012). Vocational and Civic
Education: Whither British Policy? Journal of
Philosophy of Education, 46(4), 603-618. doi:
10.1111/j.1467-9752.2012.00880.x
Winch, C. (1995). Education Needs Training.
Oxford Review of Education, 21(3), 315-325.
doi: 10.2307/1050875
Wolf, A. (2011). Review of Vocational
Education – The Wolf Report. Department for
Education, London.
Worth, S. (2005). Beating the ‘churning’ trap
in the youth labour market (Vol. 19, pp. 403-
414). London: Sage Publications.
Young, M. (2011). National vocational
qualifications in the United Kingdom: their
origins and legacy. Journal of Education and
Work, 24(3-4), 259-282. doi:
10.1080/13639080.2011.584686