Education without dead ends (Permeability blog 1/3)

In their report about permeability, Prof. Dr. Ursula Renold, Dr. Katie Caves, Dr. Patrick McDonald, and Ditjola Naço put into words (and figures) what an education system without dead ends looks like. In our permeability blog series, we will talk about why permeability is an important aspect of strong education systems and discuss tools to improve it.

12.09.2023

Number of comments

external page Click here for the full permeability report

By Marit van Dekken & Katie Caves

More than individual programs

Imagine that getting an education is like embarking on a journey through the forest. You find a trail in front of you that has been well-maintained, and so you decide to follow it - but you run into a dead end. A trail that ends like that isn’t a very good trail and you wouldn’t take it again.

This is also a key aspect in education. It's not enough to have access to education pathways with good education programs, because we also need education paths to lead somewhere. When we choose a program, we think of its value to us in terms of the next education level or a place in the job market.

This means that when talking about improving education systems and making programs more attractive, we need to consider the education system as a whole. That includes all pathways and programs, where they lead, and the connections between them.

This is at the core of strong education systems. In a strong system, people can move from any starting point to any end point. In other words, a strong education system has no dead ends.

“A strong education system has no dead ends.”
CEMETS permeability blog 1/3

Permeability: no dead ends

To achieve an education system without dead ends, we need two things:

Opportunity to choose between different education and training programs at each education level. This means programs need to exist in all types of education and training and all the way to the highest level;
Access to all education programs at all levels of the education system no matter where people started in that system. This means there are progression routes from any starting point in the system to any endpoint in the system.

We call this permeability: having the opportunity to choose between different education and training programs at each education level and having access to them no matter where you started. If these two are combined, we no longer run into dead ends.

Let’s look at a simple illustration of what “full permeability” means, and then explore less optimal versions of that. This can help to identify the overall level of permeability in an education system and give a first idea of what needs to be improved.

Click through the image slider below to explore different permeability types.

Note that the figures show levels of education (the secondary and tertiary levels in green and orange) and types of education (the academic and applied pathway in blue versus the vocational and professional pathway in pink).

The blue and pink boxes show opportunity: whether there is at least one education and training program in each level and type of education. One box can include multiple programs, like different bachelor’s and master’s programs.

The arrows show access: whether there is a transition from one program to the next. Solid black arrows show straightforward transitions, and the grey open arrows show transitions that exist but might not be straightforward.

Permeability types

Full permeability. There is at least one education and training program in each level and type of education (full opportunity). Individuals can go from any starting point to any endpoint in a straightforward manner (full access). Difficult Transitions. This example is very close to full permeability, but it’s like going on a difficult hike instead of a smooth walk: we’ll have to try really hard or at least lose some time in order to go from one road to another. Silos. We still have full opportunity because there are programs at every level and type of education. However, we have to choose which path we’ll take before walking because we can’t go from one to the other. Full access is still lacking here and the wrong choice at the start can cause a lot of problems. Springboard VET. We start in either academic or VET at the secondary level. Unfortunately, PET is missing. We have to either end our journey after secondary VET—making VET less valuable because we can’t take that path very far—or merge with the academic pathway for tertiary education. There’s no way to reach high-level vocational and professional skills. Cul-de-Sac. A cul-de-sac is a dead end road with some space to turn around. If we want to go onward from VET, the only way up is to take the academic path. Unlike the Springboard VET system, though, we’ll have to do extra requirements or repeat some secondary education before we can access tertiary academic education. Either way we’ll lose time on our way to the tertiary level. Dead-End VET. In this system type, VET is a dead end. We can’t go from there to any other program. If we want to go further, we have to go back and re-start on the academic pathway. That means VET graduates who want more years of education will have to re-do their secondary education. Academic Only. This is the least permeable education system. The academic pathway is the only option, and there is no way to get vocational and professional skills at any level. Without those other options, there’s also only one arrow representing access. This is a narrow pathway that not everyone will enjoy or be able to do, and there are no other options.

The best education systems are permeable. We can use these simplified types to start identifying the permeability status of a particular system.

But why does permeability matter so much? Without permeability, VET programs aren’t attractive, we can’t deliver the full breadth and level of skills demanded on the labor market, and we’re systematically excluding the people who don’t want to or can’t pursue an academic pathway. That’s what we’ll dive into in the next blogpost.