IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ucl/cepeob/35.html

Raising the Esteem of Vocational Education and Training (VET) from Age 14

Author

Listed:
  • Robbie Maris

    (UCL Centre for Education Policy & Equalising Opportunities)

  • Jake Anders

    (UCL Centre for Education Policy & Equalising Opportunities)

  • Gill Wyness

    (UCL Centre for Education Policy & Equalising Opportunities)

Abstract

A strong post-16 education system needs credible pathways for young people with different interests, strengths and aspirations. High-quality vocational education and training (VET) can support engagement in education, provide occupationally relevant skills and facilitate transitions into skilled employment or further study. Having a full suite of strong, well-regarded post-16 pathways is important for reducing the risk of young people becoming not in education, employment or training (NEET). The recent Milburn Review underlines the urgency of this challenge. It finds that nearly one million young people aged 16-24 are not in education, employment or training and argues that the institutions intended to support the transition from education to work are failing to operate as a coherent system (Milburn, 2026). However, around the world, vocational education tends to be held in lower regard to its academic counterpart (e.g., Sim, 2024; UNESCO-UNEVOC, 2018; Wang, 2021). This is despite a growing recognition that vocational education can often deliver equivalent or better labour market returns in modern economies than purely academic education (Dahl et al., 2023; Kreisman and Stange, 2020; LaForest, 2023).While these perceptions partially reflect underlying differences in quality in some places, there is broad acknowledgement that there are socially constructed negative attitudes unrelated to the objective quality of VET (Ackehurst et al., 2022). That is, VET is stigmatised across many societies (Ackehurst et al., 2022; Aldossari, 2020; Chankseliani et al., 2016). This is a salient issue in the UK, where ``parity of esteem'' between vocational and academic education has become an enduring policy goal. The esteem of vocational pathways matters because perceptions shape choices. Students and families consider what qualifications signal about ability, status and future opportunities. Teachers and careers advisers influence who is encouraged towards different routes. Employers decide whether qualifications certify useful skills, while universities determine which qualifications provide access to desirable courses. Negative attitudes towards VET could be driving students to take courses or pathways that are not best suited to their aspirations, abilities and needs. Stigma may also affect students after they enter a vocational route. In Flanders, around one fifth of students in technical and vocational tracks reported that others looked down on them because of their studies, and this perceived contempt was strongly associated with feelings of futility even after accounting for ability and social background (Spruyt et al., 2015). VET stigma is also likely contributing to skills shortages in technical and vocational areas, hindering economic growth and productivity. This briefing focuses primarily on school- and college-based vocational and technical education for young people aged 14-18. Apprenticeships form an important part of the wider technical education system, but differ from the programmes considered here because they combine employment with formal training and are most commonly entered after compulsory schooling (DfE, 2026). They are therefore discussed principally as a progression destination and as the work-based counterpart to classroom-based technical routes, rather than as a central focus of the briefing.

Suggested Citation

  • Robbie Maris & Jake Anders & Gill Wyness, 2026. "Raising the Esteem of Vocational Education and Training (VET) from Age 14," CEPEO Briefing Note Series 35, UCL Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities, revised Jul 2026.
  • Handle: RePEc:ucl:cepeob:35
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec-cepeo.ucl.ac.uk/cepeob/cepeobn35.pdf
    File Function: Initial version, 2026
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael LaForest, 2023. "The Effects of High School Career and Technical Education on Employment, Wages, and Educational Attainment," Journal of Human Capital, University of Chicago Press, vol. 17(1), pages 39-71.
    2. Daniel Kreisman & Kevin Stange, 2020. "Vocational and Career Tech Education in American High Schools: The Value of Depth Over Breadth," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 15(1), pages 11-44, Winter.
    3. Gordon B. Dahl & Dan-Olof Rooth & Anders Stenberg, 2023. "High School Majors and Future Earnings," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 351-382, January.
    4. Claudia Hupkau & Sandra McNally & Jenifer Ruiz-Valenzuela & Guglielmo Ventura, 2017. "Post-Compulsory Education in England: Choices and Implications," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 240(1), pages 42-57, May.
    5. Eric A. Hanushek & Guido Schwerdt & Ludger Woessmann & Lei Zhang, 2017. "General Education, Vocational Education, and Labor-Market Outcomes over the Lifecycle," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 52(1), pages 48-87.
    6. Machin, Stephen & McNally, Sandra & Terrier, Camille & Ventura, Guglielmo, 2020. "Closing the Gap between Vocational and General Education? Evidence from University Technical Colleges in England," IZA Discussion Papers 13837, IZA Network @ LISER.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hu, Yue Louise, 2026. "Credits that count: High school vocational education from sibling comparisons," Discussion Papers 2026/9, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    2. Steve Machin & Sandra McNally & Camille Terrier & Guglielmo Ventura, 2020. "Closing the Gap between Vocational and General Education? Evidence from University Technical Colleges in England," CESifo Working Paper Series 8678, CESifo.
    3. Celeste K. Carruthers & Christopher Jepsen, 2020. "Vocational Education: An International Perspective," CESifo Working Paper Series 8718, CESifo.
    4. John Eric Humphries & Juanna Schr¿ter Joensen & Gregory F. Veramendi, 2025. "Complementarities in High School and College Investments," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2446, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    5. Sandra McNally & Luis Schmidt & Anna Valero, 2024. "Do management practices matter in further education?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 91(363), pages 740-769, July.
    6. Robbie Maris, 2025. "Upper Secondary Pathways and Progression to Further Study," CEPEO Working Paper Series 25-08, UCL Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities, revised Aug 2025.
    7. Edmark, Karin, 2025. "The impact of local supply of upper secondary field of study," Working Paper Series 2025:13, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
    8. Larsson Taghizadeh, Jonas & Österman, Marcus, 2025. "Choosing the right path: The effects of pursuing general versus vocational secondary education on dropout risk and youth inactivity," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    9. Hector Espinoza & Stefan Speckesser, 2019. "A comparison of earnings related to higher level vocational/technical and academic education," CVER Research Papers 019, Centre for Vocational Education Research.
    10. repec:cep:cepisp:is03 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Chiara Cavaglia & Sandra McNally & Guglielmo Ventura, 2020. "Do Apprenticeships Pay? Evidence for England," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 82(5), pages 1094-1134, October.
    12. Sönke Hendrik Matthewes & Guglielmo Ventura, 2022. "On Track to Success? Returns to vocational education against different alternatives," CVER Research Papers 038, Centre for Vocational Education Research.
    13. Ollikainen, Jani-Petteri & Pekkarinen, Tuomas & Uusitalo, Roope & Virtanen, Hanna, 2024. "Effect of secondary education on cognitive and non-cognitive skills," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    14. Sönke Hendrik Matthewes & Guglielmo Ventura, 2022. "On Track to Success? Returns to Vocational Education Against Different Alternatives," CEPA Discussion Papers 58, Center for Economic Policy Analysis.
    15. Sandra McNally, 2018. "Apprenticeships in England: what does research tell us?," CVER Briefing Notes 008, Centre for Vocational Education Research.
    16. Leighton, Margaret & Speer, Jamin D., 2020. "Labor market returns to college major specificity," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    17. Hemelt, Steven W. & Lenard, Matthew A. & Paeplow, Colleen G., 2019. "Building bridges to life after high school: Contemporary career academies and student outcomes," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 161-178.
    18. Maïlys Korber, 2019. "Does Vocational Education Give a Labour Market Advantage over the Whole Career? A Comparison of the United Kingdom and Switzerland," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 202-223.
    19. Todd Pugatch, 2014. "Safety valve or sinkhole? Vocational schooling in South Africa," IZA Journal of Labor & Development, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 3(1), pages 1-31, December.
    20. Mahmut Ozer & Matjaž Perc, 2020. "Dreams and realities of school tracking and vocational education," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-7, December.
    21. Hahm, Dong Woo, 2026. "From curriculum to career: Early-career labor market effects of the Common Core," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • Z13 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Economic Sociology; Economic Anthropology; Language; Social and Economic Stratification

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucl:cepeob:35. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Jake Anders (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/epucluk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.