Getting the measure of early leaving from VET in Europe

Determining the whereabouts of early leavers, as swiftly and thoroughly as possible, increases their potential to re-engage with education and training and qualify. Once equipped with the right knowledge, skills and competences, these young people have a better chance to respond to labour market demands and enjoy a fulfilling career, achieving tangible personal and professional growth. Benefits at social level are also not negligible, as people’s social and professional inclusion contributes to establishing strengthened economic development and social cohesion.

While Eurostat data measure early leaving from education and training (ELET) in Europe, it is still not possible to measure how many early leavers drop out from vocational education and training (VET). Cedefop pinpointed already in a 2016 study the main weaknesses to measure early leaving from VET (ELVET) in European countries based on available data. In 2022, Cedefop launched a new survey to its reporting network ReferNet to examine developments in EU27 (except Malta) plus Iceland and Norway in improving mechanisms and support measures to monitor and measure the phenomenon at national and regional levels. The survey findings are presented in the newly published Cedefop synthesis report Stemming the tide: tackling early leaving from vocational education and training in times of crises drafted by Irene Psifidou and Anthie Kyriakopoulou.

Challenges to measure early leaving from VET in Europe persist

Findings show that, overall, there are no nationally agreed definitions for defining early leaving from VET (ELVET) in European countries. Only two countries (Latvia and Hungary) explicitly reported that a national definition of ELVET is available. Often, it was reported that instead of ELVET national definitions, other indicators or definitions are used and monitored. The EU definition of early leaving from education and training (ELET) and different dropout measurements were the ones mentioned most often.

Despite the overwhelming lack of official definitions, 18 European countries do collect data on students dropping out from VET using different sources, indicators and methodologies. Data are collected, for instance, through school registries or national databases which register relevant information on learners. These data, however, do not always allow to calculate ELVET based on Cedefop’s working definition that would have allowed comparability across Europe. Cedefop understands ELVET as the percentage of population (a) who is aged 18 to 24; (b) whose highest level of education or training completed is ISCED 2011 level 0, 1 or 2 (ISCED 1997: 0, 1, 2 or 3C short); (c) who has started a vocational training at ISCED level 3 or 4 but did not receive an upper secondary VET qualification; and (d) who has not received any education or training (i.e. neither formal nor non-formal) in the four weeks preceding the survey (not currently engaged in education and training). In the national approaches to define, monitor and measure ELVET, concepts and methods differ greatly; for example, countries consider significantly different age ranges (e.g. 16-20 in Latvia vs 15-24 with specific policy interest in those aged 15-17 in Austria). In a few cases, age is not registered at all, as with dropouts or contract dissolution in Germany and Lithuania. 

Cedefop in its new publication examines the existing difficulties in measuring ELVET across Europe and provides with useful recommendations and guidelines on how such a comparable data collection mechanism could be developed in the future.

Half of the countries monitor early leaving through a centralised monitoring system

A centralised system that gathers nominal information on early leavers and includes mechanisms to ensure that a majority of VET providers flag early leavers in a timely manner is available in half of the surveyed countries. Although a centralised system may not be available in all countries, most of them have local or coordinated services responsible for getting in touch with early leavers and referring them to relevant measures.

The majority of countries identify and support learners at risk of dropping out

Around 20 countries have processes and mechanisms in place for identifying and supporting learners who are still in VET but are at risk of dropping out. These may concern early warning systems to identify promptly those learners at risk; provision of related continuing professional development (CPD) for VET teachers and trainers in schools; and multidisciplinary teams in place to support those learners. Almost all of them also offer career guidance to support learner choices and pathways. Further, half of the countries have arrangements to make up for lost learning. 

While support to learners at risk in schools is widespread in Europe, in work-based settings, apprentices who may also be at risk of dropping out, are not equally supported. Only eight countries provide CPD to in-company trainers to enable them to identify and support apprentices at risk.

Why drop out form VET?

The reasons leading someone to abandon his/her studies have been studied systematically at worldwide level. All studies reveal that taking such a decision may be caused by different reasons. Literature is rich in discussing and categorising them. In the case of vocational education and training, Cedefop presented such reasons in its 2016 study, while in its recent survey, findings show how some of these have faded out while others became more pominent.17 countries have reported that they collect data on the factors leading to dropout of VET. According to the survey findings, the top four reasons for dropping out of VET in Europe are (in descending order): 

• low overall education achievement and attendance;
• health and wellbeing issues;
• lack of family engagement and support; 
• lack of or insufficient guidance to support their choices.

At the opposite end of the spectrum, the least frequent reasons leading to ELVET include:

• systemic/structural reasons (e.g. low permeability of the education system; early differentiation and track selection);
• lack of apprenticeship placements or other in-company training;
• poor employment outcomes for VET graduates because of the unattractiveness of the labour market (e.g. VET qualifications lead to low-paid jobs);
• unsatisfactory working conditions during their work-based learning;
• inappropriate/unattractive teaching methods.

These findings show that structural factors linked to the lack of flexibility / permeability and low quality of VET identified in Cedefop’s 2016 study as important factors leading to dropout, have been addressed over the years through the efforts Member States have made to modernise and reform their VET systems.

How did countries support their students and teachers during Covid-19 to prevent early leaving?

International organisations and other well-know researchers have analysed the impact of Covid-19 and the extended school closures on students’ learning outcomes. It is commonly proven that their learning outcomes have decreased significantly due to the pandemic. The recently published PISA 2022 results confirmed such findings with very few exceptions of countries which managed to maintain or even improve students’ performance.

Cedefop’s survey collected information on the supportive measures provided during school closures as an attempt to examine the degree of support offered to students, teachers, school principals and in-company trainers during online distance learning. Findings show that in all countries, VET institutions offered online courses during lockdown and, in almost all, monitored learner participation. However, in most cases, these data were not analysed at national level to monitor absenteeism and risk of dropping out during online learning.  

The monitoring picture of learners’ participation changes significantly when it comes to work-based learning in companies: only in eight countries companies monitored the participation of apprentices in online distance learning. This means that in most countries, it is not known how many apprentices continued their work-based studies during lockdown.

In most countries, learners in school-based settings were offered psychological and mental health support during school closures. Half of the countries provided VET learners with training on digital skills. Most countries provided learners with free internet connection and necessary equipment, and adapted the school-based programme to distance learning, e.g. teaching of practical elements of school-based learning through simulations. Only in a few countries was online material in school-based learning settings translated for ethnic minorities and refugees. 

Much less information was available about the support provided in work-based learning settings: companies provided VET learners with free internet connection, necessary equipment and training on digital skills to support their participation in distance learning in only a few countries. Only three of them offered psychological and mental health support to learners. 12 countries adapted the work-based learning programmes to distance learning and in only one country online material and guidelines for learners in work-based learning were translated into different languages spoken by ethnic minorities and refugees.

In most of the countries, school VET teachers and trainers were provided with access to free equipment and internet connection as well as training on digital tools, platforms, and creation of digital teaching content. In half of the countries, VET teachers and trainers were informed on privacy issues, copyright, and data protection to implement distance learning.

What can be done next to measure early leaving from VET in Europe?

The key policy messages of the report highlight the need of a systematic collection of comparable data on ELVET. The collection of comparable data ideally requires a European ELVET definition and methodology to be adopted and all countries to collect data based on it. As this is not a readily available option, possibilities to measure early leaving from VET arise from the Labour Force Survey 2024 module. This will include new variables (DROPEDUC, DROPEDUCLEVEL, DROPEDUCREAS and MEDLEVQUAL) that will be collected every 8 years, distinguishing between general and vocational education. Although this represents a great development, also reflecting earlier recommendations drawn from Cedefop (Cedefop 2016a; Cedefop, 2012), representativeness, quality and comparability of the statistics and indicators which could be derived are still subject to feasibility checks. Further, the 8-year frequency of this module does not allow systematic annual data collection to measure ELVET.

Quantitative data need to be complemented with qualitative data. The new 2024 LFS module includes the main reasons for not completing a formal education programme. Although this is an important development, this list of the considered reasons is not comprehensive enough to capture the complexity of the phenomenon and the coexistence of various reasons. Important influences, such as the academic underachievement, are not considered. To allow targeted policy-making, information about whether there are reasons specific to school or work-based learning within a VET programme is also needed. 

Moreover, it is important to monitor the phenomenon of early leaving not only in schools, but also in work-based learning settings, where data are scarce. While in most countries, there is a well-developed culture of inclusion in school-based learning settings, there is more uncertainty when it comes to companies. The survey findings suggest the need to employ effective policies to empower also in-company trainers and support apprentices at risk of dropping out.