THEWORLDBANK

Discussion Paper

EDUCATION AND TRAINING SERIES

Report No. EDT31

To Vocationalize or not to Vocationalize?That is fhe Curiculum Question

George PsacharopoulosJune 1986

Education and Training Department Operations Policy Staff

The viewfs presented here are those of the author(s), and they should not be interpreted as reflecting those of the World Bank

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Discussion Paper

Education and Training Series

Report No. EDT31

TO VOCATIONALIZE OR NOT TO VOCATIONALIZE?THAT IS THE CURRICULUM QUESTION

George Psacharopoulos

Research DivisionEducation and Training Department

June 1986

The World Bank does not accept responsibility for the views expressedherein, which are those of the author(s) and should not be attributed tothe World Bank or to its affiliated organizations. The findings,interpretations, and conclusions are the results of research or analysissupported by the Bank; they do not necessarily represent official policy ofthe Bank.

Copyright g 1986 The International Bank for Reconstructionand Development/The World Bank

Abstract

The paper presents a framework within which curriculum options can beanalyzed, with emphasis on the economics of choosing the vocationalintensity of instruction. Empirical evidence is revielved at the primary,secondary and university levels regarding the costs and benefits ofalternative programs. Such evidence indicates that the costs of vocationalprograms are considerable higher than general education while theirbenefits are comparable. The paper questions the validity of providing.vocational instruction in the mainstream educational system and considersmore efficient alternatives like pure vocational instil:utions oremployment-based training.

TO VOCATIONALIZE OR NOT TO VOCATIONAU.IZE?THAT IS THE CURRICULUM QUESTION

What is taught in school - the curriculum - is the result of a

complex process involving a variety of actors. At the compulsory schooling

level, it mostly reflects a social (paternalistic and national) consensus

on the subject matter every child should master. At the post-compulsory

levels, such consensus is diluted by what students and their families want

to be taught, and the nature of skills in demand by the employers. The

private choice element as a determinant of the curriculum becomes stronger

in post-compulsory education and in non-state supported institutions, such

as proprietary schools.

Traditionally, the subject matter has been determined by

educators who, taking social or private values into account, lay out the

syllabi and number of periods each subject should be tiaught. Economic

considerations are rarely mentioned in the curriculum Literature. Once

politicians and educators are persuaded that a given curriculum option

should be taught ir school, curriculum reform is mandated. However,

whether the reform is implemented or not, or whether it: eventually has its

intended effect, is also a function of elementary economics.

-2-

The purpose of this paper is, first, to provide an analytical

framework within which curriculum issues can be analyzed, and second, to

present a review of empirical findings touching upon the economics of the

curriculum, especially in developing countries. It is concluded that, by

necessity, economic considerations will be increasingly incorporated into

policy decisions on the curriculum content.

I. Analytical Framework

One major dimension of the curriculum is the degree of its

vocationalization. At the primary level, the question is usually cast in

terms of "ruralizing the curriculum" or "combining education with

production". At the secondary level, the policy issue is whether to

"diversify" the curriculum or to include "pre-vocational", "enrichment" or

"practical" subjects. At the post-secondary level, the issue is cast in

terms of "fields of study",i.e. whether the university faculty mix should

be biased towards clearly vocational subjects (like agronomy), or the

liberal arts.

In all cases, curriculum choice is a matter of degree rather than

being black-or-white. Figure 1 gives an example of the degree of

vocationalization that can be provided at the secondary school level. At

the extreme left are the traditional academic secondary schools emphasizing

language, mathematics, history, geography and science. Next are the

comprehensive or diversified schools which, beyond academic subjects offer

pre-vocational courses, eg. in industrial arts, agriculture or commerce.

Further to the right lie secondary level pure vocational schools dedicated

to a particular profession, eg. auto mechanics. At the extreme right is

another choice, never considered in curriculum discussions, that the

vocational skills can be imparted by on-the-job training outside the school

system.

Snge Toct MUIMok Srgle-Troek OOht*-JobContnt ACademic Do*lmed Vocatona Tflning

1 , nr.ehenl Vccotkl svIDa¢ GYM40a0 S0ocF ' , Factay

Ck. 'n co &' lctO

Figure 1: Intensity of.Vocationalized Curriculum by Type of Education

From an economic viewpoint, the basic policy questions are:

- what is the socially optimum curriculum mix, and

- how should given curriculum offerings be financed.

Such questions lead to issues of efficiency and equity that can

be analyzed within standard economic theory of social choice. The ultimate

objective is to maximize social wellbeing (W) subject to the available

resources (R). Social wellbeing may be operationally (although narrowly)

defined as consisting of total real income (Y) and its distribution

(Var Y), i.e.

(1) Max W f (Y, Var Y)

Subject to R.

-4-

Changing the curriculum content could only by accident be neutral

in terms of its social welfare effects. For example, moving towards a

higher degree of vocationalization entails reallocating resources

among alternative uses which probably have differential productivity, and

the benefits and costs of which are differently distributed across

socioeconomic groups in the population.

Efficiency Effects of the Curriculum

These can be measured by comparing the costs to the benefits of

having curriculum A rather than B. The resulting benefit-cost ratio of

curriculum A, can be compared to similar benefit-cost ratios for curricula

C, D...Z. Choosing curricula with the highest benefit-cost ratios, other

things being equal, leads a higher level of societal wellbeing (increased

value of the efficiency argument Y in equ. 1).

The social cost of a given curriculum choice is relatively easy

to measure - it is the sum of the value of teachers' time, students' time,

and classroom and laboratory use per unit of instruction. Evaluating the

benefits side is more difficult for there is not always a perfect market

where the curriculum "product" is sold and a price established. Yet in

competitive economies or private sector employment, it is reasonable to

assume that the earnings of graduates is a good proxy for their

productivity. Hence, comparing the earnings of graduates from different

curriculum tracks to a common control group gives an indication of their

differential productivity.

- 5' -

This is illustrated in Figure 2 which depicts the benefit (Y) and

cost (C) streams associated with two different kinds of secondary education

general (gen) and vocational (voc), using primary schooling (p) as the

control group. In such case, the rates of return (r) to the two types of

education can be approximated as we follows through the following short-cut

formula(for an explanation of the rationale behind this formula, see

Psacharopoulos 1981).

Ys.gen - Yprs. gen

4 (Yp + Cs.gen)

YS.voc -YP

rs.voc4 (Yp + Cs.voc)

1-X

P- :

Figure 2: A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Alternative Secondary SchoolCurricula

The relative size of the two rates of return will depend upon the

empirical tradeoff between the shaded areas in Figure 2, which represent

the incremental benefits and costs associated with vocational versus

general education. Thus from an efficiency point of view, one should give

priority to the expansion of that type of secondary education whose returns

are highest, and of course assuming that the rate of return to such level

and type of education is above the social discount rate (say, 10 percent).

Equity Effects

Equity issues in education can be addressed at several levels.

First, do less privileged groups in the population have increased access to

levels and types of education that will be eventually rewarding? Second,

are those who are privately benefiting from a given education (eg., through

higher lifetime earnings) really bearing the cost of their education?

Third, is the dispersion of earnings in society reduced as a result of the

type of education provided? The first dimension of equity relates to

factors at the school entry level and can be measured by means of a

representation index (I) comparing the entrants (E) to a particular

curriculum offering (c) to those in the population (P) disaggregated by

socio-economic group (i), i.e.

Eci

Pi

The second dimension of equity entails measuring the incidence of

costs and benefits associated with different curriculum offerings, e.g., is

the student, the employer or the general taxpayer who really pays for

different types of education? The third dimension of equity refers to an

even more delicate distinction, i.e. what happens after the student leaves

school. Are the rewards stemming from different types of schooling

-8-

distributed more equally in the population because curriculum A was chosen

rather than B? These are straight empirical matters, but on which very

little evidence exists regarding the curr.iculum dimension; Hence in the

following section, we shall present what is known on the efficiency aspects

of the curriculum.

-9-

II. The Evidence

Primary Education

Vocationalization at the primary level in developing countries

takes the form of "ruralizing the curriculum", "combining education with

production" or "introducing manual labor". The logic of the argument

appears impeccable - youth should learn about what they will most likely

engage in, i.e. agriculture. Although there hardly exist rigorous

evaluations of such programs, what we do know runs against introducing

vocationalism at the primary level.

The best evidence of the failure of ruralized curricula is their

rejection by parents who are often more aware than the! central "planning"

authorities on where the real opportunities for their children are. (E.g.,

see the example of Burkina Faso, former Upper Volta, in Ahmed and Coombs

1975). It is romantic to expect the offspring of farmers to remain in the

countryside where labor productivity is low and not migrate to the town

where, in spite of some initial "unemployment" the eventual reward will be

greater. Furthermore, it runs counter to the national interest to attempt,

by means of ruralizing the curriculum, to prevent an adjustment that will

eventually take place, i.e, the movement of labor from low (rural) to high

(urban) productivity areas. We also know that in two countries

diametrically different in social organization -- India and China, that

have followed such policy in the past, the policy has been abandoned (see

Zachariah and Hoffman, 1985).

- 10 -

Looking at the other side of the coin we do know that the

provision of a general curriculum at the primary level enhances farm

productivity. For example, Jamison and Lau (1982) found that the provision

of four years of education rather than none, other things being equal,

increases on average agricultural productivity by nine percent.

Harma (1979) has elaborated on the mechanisms linking

agricultural productivity and basic learning. At a first level of

technology, mostly dominated by traditional farming and local varieties of

seeds and implements, farmers need only rudimentary arithmetic and

literacy. But as agricultural technology becomes more sophisticated,

especially in full-irrigation and high-yield seed varieties, farmers need

reading, writing and calculation abilities sophisticated enough to cope

with instructions regarding fertilizer application and water rates per

acre. They may also need elementary knowledge of chemistry, physics or

biology.

In some sense, a general education curriculum at the primary

school level, emphsizing the 3 R's and basic science, may be the most

vocational and relevant type of education one may provide to assist farming

in a particular area.

Secondary Education

Vocationalism at this level takes two forms: introducing

practical subjects in an otherwise academic curriculum, or offering purely

vocational subjects in separate institutions dedicated to technical/

vocational studies. The evidence from research indicates that the costs of

these programs are higher than general education while their benefits are

comparable.

- 11 -

On the cost issue there exists some evidence from a recent

evaluation of diversified schools in Colombia and Tanzania. Appendix Table

A-1 reports the cost structure of the curriculum in twD types of schools:

the relatively recent diversified schools (INEM, Institutos Nacionales de

Educacion Media) and conventional schools of the academic or vocational

type at the same (secondary) level. Within the INEM group, agriculture-is

the relatively most expensive subject. Within the traditional school

system, where costing is easier and most reliable, the academic subject is

by far the cheapest. Table A-2 shows that costs are 14 percent higher in

the so-called "biased" schools than in those emphasizing academic subjects

in Tanzania. Regarding the government-financed part of the recurrent cost,

biased schools are on average 34 percent more costly. (Hinchliffe, 1983).

Table 1 shows the unit cost structure of the secondary curriculum

in five countries. On average, agricultural and especially technical/

Table 1

The Relative Unit Cost Structure of the Secondary school Curriculum

(Index: Academic = 100)

CurriculumCountry

Academic/ Agricultural CommLercial Technical/General Industrial

Colombia 100 119 101 125Tanzania 100 119 109 113Malaysia 100 -- 163 163Barbados 100 139 158 142Jordan 100 -- -- 196

Source: Appendix Tables A-1, A-2, A-5, A-7 and A-li.Note: The academic/general index base in Barbados and Malaysia refers to

the "English" subject.- : Not available.

- 12 -

industrial subjects are significantly more expensive than the general/

academic option. In Malaysia, for example, it requires 60 percent more

resources to keep one student in the technical/industrial stream than in

the academic stream.1 /

A recent report on the evaluation of secondary technical schools

in Kenya concludes that in terms of teaching costs and supplies, industrial

education is twice as expensive as other subjects (Lauglo, 1985, p.189).

When capital costs are considered, the difference is more dramatic. Table

A-3 gives the building cost (per student place) for the various subjects

showing that the capital component industrial education is five to six

times more expensive relative to general education.

In the United States, Nystrom and Hennessy (1975) analyzed cost

data of 21 Illinois regular and 5 vocational secondary schools. Their

conclusion was that the vocational schools were twice as expensive as

regular schools (for a review of similar U.S. studies see Hu, 1980).

Table 2 gives a simple clue as to why vocational subjects are

expensive. Beyond the fact that specialized teachers receive higher pay

relative to their academic counterparts, the cost of constructing,

furnishing and equipping, say, an industrial arts workshop in Barbados is

nearly seven times that of an ordinary classroom.

1/ An earlier review had found that, on average, vocational schoolcurricula cost two-to-three times as much as general curricula (seeAppendix Table A-4).

- 13 -

Table 2

The Relative Capital Cost of Alternative Classrooms

(Index: Ordinary Classroom = 100)

Country Ordinary Science IndustrialClassroom Classroom Arts

Malaysia a/ 100 467

Barbados a/ 100 243 695

China a/ 100 480

Jordan a/ 100 203 614

Kenya b/ 100 -- 550

Source: Appendix Tables A-3, A-6, A-8, A-10 and A-12.Note: a/ Refers to furniture and equipment cost.

b/ Refers to construction cost.

- 14 -

The extra cost of vocational or prevocational subjects at the

secondary level could be justified if society derived correspondingly extra

benefits from such investment. Yet the existing evidence does not

substantiate this hope. Several evaluations of such programs, both in

advanced and developing countries have typically concluded that the extra

benefits are not there.

Table 3 shows that, in Colombia, graduating from a diversified or

conventional vocational curriculum does not necessarily increase the

propensity to join the labor market. Yet this was a major rationale for

vocationalizing the curriculum in developing countries, often cast in terms

of "stopping the one-way street from the school to the university".

Table 3

Percent Working One Year After Graduation by School Type and Subject:Colombia, 1981 Cohort

Curriculum INEM TraditionalSchool School

Academic 30 29Agricultural 27 36Commercial 29 32Industrial 31 32

Source: Psacharopoulos (1985a),, p.515.

Do those coming from vocational curricula experience less

unemployment before getting a job? The data for Colombia do not

substantiate this hypothesis. If anything, they show the reverse, as

indicated in Table 4, i.e., those who have followed vocational courses in

either INEM or traditional schools have significantly longer periods of

unemployment.

-15-

Table 4

Period of Unemployment Before First Job by School Typeand Curriculum: Colombia, 1981 Cohort (Number of Weeks)

Subject INEM TraditionalSchool School

Academic 21.2 21.6Vocational 25.6 26.4

Note: Between-subject differences are significant at the.01 level.

Source: Psacharopoulos (1985a), p. 516.

Table 5 gives the mean earnings of INEM and control graduates

working full time. Earnings differences are very modest. 1/ But academic

gradutes earn more, relative to the rest.

Table 5

Monthly Earnings One Year after Graduation by School Typeand Curriculum: Colombia (in 1981 Pesos)

Curriculum INEM TraditionalSchool School

Academic 10,639 10,070Agricultural 9,520 9,596Commercial 9,664 9,322Industrial 9,408 10,291

Source: Psacharopoulos (1985a), p. 516.

1/ See also Psacharopoulos and Zabalza (1984) for a comprehensive analysisof the earnings of the 1978 Colombian cohort of secondary schoolgraduates.

-16-

Table 6 shows no major differences in the ways that employment,

further education, and training are distributed by curriculum bias in

Tanzania. But technical students are more likely to be employed and less

likely to be seeking schooling, work, or training. Similarly to the case

of Colombia, evidence from Tanzania does not support the view that the

incorporation of pre-vocational studies into secondary school has decreased

the demand for more schooling.

Table 6

1982 Activity of Form IV Graduates: Tanzania, 1981 Cohort (percent)

1981 Form IV Curriculum Bias1982 Status Agricultural Technical Commercial Academic Overall

Working 13.7 17.4 14.2 14.1 14.4Looking 15.8 9.8 15.7 13.4 14.5

Source: Psacharopoulos (1985a), p. 517.

According to one of the main purposes of diversification, it

would be expected that graduates of agricultural, technical, and commercial

biases would experience a shorter period of unemployment than those from

academic schools. The data for Tanzania, however, do not support this, as

Table 7 shows. One year after graduation, 13 percent of academic students

were still looking for either work or training, whereas the percentages for

technical, commercial, and agricultural students were 8, 16, and 16,

respectively.

-17-

Table 7

Unemployment Rates in 1982 by Curriculum BiasTanzania, 1981 Cohort (percent)

Agricultural Technical Commercial Academic

Unemployment rate 16 8 16 13

;Source: Psacharopoulos (1985a), p. 518.

In the United States it has been found repeatedly, and using high

quality longitudinal data sets (such as Parnes' NLS and the NLS of 1972

High School Graduates) that vocational program graduates do not have an

earnings advantage over general program graduates (Gustrnan and Steinmeier,

1981).

In his study of New York City High Schools, Taussing (1968)

documented "the lack of success of vocational training in increasing the

market productivity of the graduates, despite the large incremental costs

shown to be devoted to vocational training relative to alternative high

school programs" (p.59). The same conclusion was reached by Corazzini

(1968) in his analysis of vocational versus general high schools in

Worcester, Massachusetts: "The program of vocational education for

boys...was, at best, only marginally profitable" (p. 120).

- 18 -

A 1978 study of graduates from secondary technical and general

schools in the Mexico City metropolitan area has found that the earnings of

general education graduates are higher than their technical counterparts;

that the rate of return to investment in technical education is very low;

and that graduates from technical secondary schools prefer to continue

studying at the university (Munoz Izquierdo and Rodriguez, 1980).

Urquidi (1982) notes that in Mexico, vocational education

attracts lower social sectors and classes. 'But quite naturally, the

social goal of these groups is not necessarily to become skilled workers or

middle-level technicians, but to enter the mainstream of education and

employment in white-collar jobs". (p. 120). Such finding was repeated in

the Colombian and Tanzanian case studies reported earlier, in the sense

that graduates of pre-vocational courses did not as a rule follow the field

of their specialization in further education or training.

A study by Al-Bukhari (1968) on secondary school programs in

Jordan found that the vocational streams cost ten times more per pupil than

academic secondary schooling and that the benefit-cost ratio for vocational

graduates was 2 to 1 while for academic secondary graduates the ratio was 3

to 1.

Other studies of vocational school programs in Sri Lanka

(Wijemanna and Welkala 1975), India (Fuller 1976), Barbados (Oxtoby 1977)

and Swaziland (Sullivan 1981), have shown similar results. In general,

students attend an academic school, if they have a choice; industry is

reluctant to pay the salaries expected by vocational graduates; maintaining

- 19 -

up-to-date shop equipment similar to that used in modern industry is too

costly for most school budgets; and students often do not take jobs in the

field for which they were trained.

A diversified secondary school program was implemented in El

Salvador in 1971 aimed to improve the employability of secondary school

leavers and to prepare them for further studies in the streams of secondary

school specialization. McGinn and Balart (1980) report no significant

differences among graduates of different streams with retspect to employment

or earnings. In terms of further education, no relatioship was found

between secondary school specialization and higher education career.

In Brazil, a 1970 Law required all secondary schools to become

comprehensive and introduce vocational subjects with the ultimate aim to

impart occupational skills to all high school graduates., According to

Castro (1983, p.9), this "country-wide school reform that was to offer

practical content to all students turned out to be a fai lure".

A recent study provides a critical appraisal of Nigerian

vocational education at the secondary level (Urevbu, 1984). According to

the author, it is not certain that vocational education in Nigeria promotes

economic development any more than conventional schooling (p. 227).

Negative preliminary results were obtained from an evaluation of

secondary industrial schools in Kenya. A tracer study of their graduates

has not revealed any employment advantage over a control. group of academic

secondary school graduates (Narman, Hilderson, Sjolund and Soderstrom,

1984, Table 3). And as already noted, the unit cost of industrial schools

is about double that of control schools.

Finally Chapman and Windham (1985) recently reported a negative

evaluation of secondary technical schools in Somalia.

- 20 -

The Returns to Investment in Diversified Curricula

The cost and earnings data reported earlier were used to estimate

rates of return to investment in various curricula. Abstracting from the

particular specialization, INEM schools in Colombia appear to have slightly

higher returns (see Table 8). But the academic subject in traditional

schools appears to be associated with an even higher rate of return. Given

the nature of the earnings and cost data and the simplifying assumptions of

the shortcut formula, the differences in the rates of return between INEM

and control schools cannot be regarded as significant. Although some

tracks appear to have higher profitability than others, the differences are

not wide enough to conclude that the introduction of prevocational tracks

results in secondary schooling being more economically efficient. But in

Tanzania the academic (control) schools exhibit the highest rate of return

(6.3 percent) and the technical bias, the least (1.7 percent).

Table 8

Approximate Social Rates of Return to Investment in SecondaryEducation by Subject and School Type: (percent)

Colombia TanzaniaSubject INEM Traditional

School School

Academic 7.7 9.3 6.3Agricultural 9.1 7.2 5.4Commercial 8.4 8.9 9.3 8.8 3.2 3.4Industrial/Technical 9.2 1 9.9 1.7

Source: Psacharopoulos (1985a), p.522, 523.Note: Based on earnings adjusted for ability and socioeconomic

factors.

-21-

It is commonly thought that introducing a vocational element in

the secondary school curriculum, especially in developing countries, is

conducive to economic development. But, as shown in Table'9, in many other

countries the returns to investment in traditional academic (general)

curricula are greater on average than the returns to investment in

specialized subjects. Again, this is due to the higher unit cost of

producing technical graduates and the fact that graduates from both streams

are absorbed equally well by the labor market.

Table 9

The Social Returns to Secondary Education by Curriculum

(Percent)

Curriculum

Academic Vocational

Cyprus 1975 10.5 7.41979 6.8 5.5

France 1970 10.1 7.6

Indonesia 1978 32.0 18.0

Liberia 1983 20.0 14.0

Taiwan 1970 26.2 27.4

Source: Psacharopoulos (1985b), Table B-3.

- 22 -

University Education

The same pattern observed regarding the type of secondary school

curriculum also applies to higher education programs.l/ As shown in Table

10, agricultural subjects are on top of the relative expensiveness list:

Table 10

The Relative Cost of University Subjects

(Index: All higher education subjects = 100)

Subject Index

Agriculture 191Sciences 125Engineering 111Arts 73Humanities 67Social Sciences 50

Source: Psacharopoulos (1980), p. 3.

The reason faculties such as agriculture, engineering and

sciences are more expensive than others is the use of costly laboratory

space and a lower student-teacher ratio. (For documented examples see

Psacharopoulos 1980, Appendix C, especially Tables C.4, C.9, and C.14).

This is also the case with non-university post-secondary

institutions. As a rule of thumb, these institutions are heavily

vocationally-oriented, mostly offer an agricultural curriculum and are very

1/ For the intricacies of classifying higher education faculties into"vocational" or "general", see Bennett Jr., 1967, Psaharopoulos,1980 and Lauglo, 1983.

- 23 -

expensive, even when compared with universities. For example, the cost per

student place of the two National Institutes of Mechanical Engineering in

Algeria (Setif and Tiaset) exceeds 30,000 in 1978 US$ (See Psacharopoulos

1980, Table C.24). The Portuguese case also helps demonstrate this point.

Table A-14 shows that non-university status higher education institutions

in Portugal have a higher unit cost than most universities in the country,

and that this unit cost nearly matches that of the prestigious University

of Coimbra.

- 24 -

Turning to university benefits these can be approximated by the

relative earnings advantage of graduates of various disciplines. The

earnings discrepancies shown below are not as wide as the cost

discrepancies between subjects. But agricuture is now in the bottom of the

earnings league.

Table 11

The Relative Earnings of University Graduates by Faculty

(Index: All higher education graduates = 100)

Subject Index

Agriculture 87Sciences 88Humanities 93Arts 94Economics 103Social Sciences 104Engineering 106Medicine 109Law 118

Source: Psacharopoulos (1980), p. 45.Note: Countries included in this table are the Philippines,

Malaysia, Iran, Tanzania and Zambia.

These averages of course conceal differences between individual

countries. In most cases, however, agricultural graduates earn

substantially less than higher education graduates as a whole. Also,

science graduates earn invariably less than the average student body.

Contrary to what might be expected (because of the non-specificity or

non-technicality of the curriculum), social sciences, economics and law

graduates are doing rather well in some country settings.

- 25 -

Given the cost and earnings structures presented above, it is not

surprising that the returns to investment in some "soft" faculties like

economics and the social sciences are greater on average than the returns

to some "harder" or "more relevant" faculties like agriculture (Table 12).

Table 12

The Returns to Investment in Higher Education, by Faculty

Subject Rate of Return (percent)

Economics 13

Law 12

Social Sciences 11

Medicine 12

Engineering 12

Sciences, Math, Physics 8

Agriculture 8

Source: Based on Table A-13.

- 26 -

III. Discussion

Where does the above review lead to? On the one hand, there is

the face valid, and irresistably logical, argument that the school system

in developing countries should be vocationalized in order to increase its

relevance to the needs of a moderniziag economy. On the other hand, nearly

every evaluation of the performance of vocational education to meet such

needs, in developing or industrialized countries, has been negative. If

this is so, the policy maker is at best confused regarding the content of

the curriculum to be adopted in schools. If vocationalization has failed,

how will the necessary skills be provided?

In my opinion, there are two key elements in getting out of this

puzzle. The first element is on the supply side, i.e. where best

vocational education should be provided, and the second is on the demand

side, i.e. who wants to be vocationally trained.1 /

First, there is continued resistance by policy makers and school

administrators to understand the simple notion that the provision of skills

in a given economy does not have to be school-based, and that even if it

were school-based, it does not have to take place in the mainstream

educational system. Employment-based training has been the traditional

mode by which skills have been formed for centuries. Where a country lacks

1/ There might also appear to be a third, macro, element, i.e. theavailable opportunity-jobs structure in the economy. However, I arguethat this is not a distinct element and it is subsumed within the secondone, i.e. people's demand for the acquisition of specific vocationalskills is based on their perceived job-opportunities structure upongraduation. In addition, nearly every attempt to forecast the number ofskills required by the economy has failed, in both advanced anddeveloping countries (see Ahamad and Blaug 1973, and Psacharopoulos1984).

- 27 -

the industrial base for apprenticeship or on-the-job-training, say, in

automobile welding robotics, a course in robotics should not be offered in

the first place (because there would be no employment opportunity for the

graduates). If the country contemplates the opening of a multinational

automobile assembly plant in the near future, then, perhaps, such course

could be provided in a special institution dedicated to vocational studies,

completely separate from the mainstream education system., and preferably

run and financed by the multinational company itself.

Such lack of understanding was described twenty years ago by a

sociologist as the "vocational school fallacy" in developing planning

(Foster 1967), echoed by many economists thereafter (e.g., Blaug 1973).

But the intuitive appeal of vocationalization - or relevance argument - is

so strong that in a country like the United States, vocational education,

in spite of its failures, keeps being regenerated from its ashes (Grubb

1978 and 1985, Weisberg 1983).

The second element in understanding the failure of

vocationalism relates to the effective demand for, or willingness, of

people to exercise a particular profession. This type of demand is very

different from the actual observed enrollment in schools of different

types, i.e. students are often forced, faute de mieux, to follow a

vocational track because the academic one is constrained. In such case,

which is typical in developing countries, the vocational school will fail

because of the inherent contradiction between the students' preferences and

the type of schooling offered. After graduation, those coming from the

vocational stream will compete with those from the academic stream in

entering the university or, if tertiary places are also constrained, in

- 28 -

exercising white-collar, clerical occupations. Few graduates of, say, the

agricultural stream, will enter agriculture, because in the first place

they never intended to. They simply entered the agricultural stream

because this was the only open route to obtain a secondary school

certificate. Furthermore, such effective and involuntary streaming

exacerbates social inequalities because it will be those who cannot

financially afford to persist for entry into the better opportunity

academic curricula that will enroll in the vocational courses.

Now, let us contrast the above typical situation with one in

which agricultural training or automechanics were offered in a dedicated

institution outside the formal school system--perhaps in a training center

run by the Ministry of Labor. Such institution would by its very nature

attract students who are more willing or committed ex ante to exercise that

particular profession upon graduation. Even better would be a case where

the specialized training were provided to those already in the profession,

i.e. by on-the-job-training within the employing firm.

The out-of-formal school or employment-based training has at

least three further major advantages over the traditional offering of

vocational courses in the mainstream educational system. First, the

training is more "relevant" to the content of the profession, in the sense

that dedicated vocational institutions, and firms in particular, are closer

to technological developments in their fields. Second, the burden of

financing of vocational education falls more on the shoulders of the

beneficiaries of such education i.e., the student himself in a proprietary

vocational school, or the employer. Third, the opportunity cost of the

- 29 -

training process is less than an equivalent course in the formal school

system because the trainee usually works part-time while studying. It is

mainly for this reason that a recent evaluation of Colombia's national

training system (SENA) arrived at a 22 percent social rate of return

associated with this activity (Jimenez, Kugler and Horn, 1986).

Because of its inherently logical and simplistic appeal,

vocationalism will be with us for the years to come, and more countries

will, in vain, attempt to tune their formal educational system to the world

of work. 1/ However, the present financial crisis plaguing the economy of

most countries may oblige policy makers to increasingly obey economic

signals in reforming school curricula.

1/ But note King's recent (1985) emphasis on the importance of generaleducation to meet the educational needs of a society in transition.

- 30 -

REFERENCES

Ahmed, M. and Coombs, P.H., (eds) Education for Rural Development: CaseStudies for Planners, Praeger, 1975.

Al-Bukhari, N., "Issues in Occupational Education: A Case Study in Jordan,"SIDEC, Stanford, California, 1968.

Bennett, W.S. Jr., "Educational Change and Economic Development," Sociologyof Education, Spring 1967.

Blaug, M., Education and the Employment Problem in Developing Countries,Geneva, ILO, 1973.

Castro, C. de Moura, "High Technology in Intermediate Countries? The Caseof Brazil," Brazilia, Instituto de Planej-amento Economico eSocial, June 1983 (mimeo).

Chapman, D.W. and Windham, D.M. "Academic Program 'Failures' and theVocational School 'Fallacy"' Policy Issues in Secondary Educationin Somalia," International Journal of Educational Development,Vol. 5, No. 4, 1985: 269-82.

Corazzini, A.J., "The Decision to Invest in Vocational Education: AnAnalysis of Costs and Benefits", Journal of Human Resources 3,(Supplement) 1968.

Foster, P.J. "The Vocational School Fallacy in Development Planning," inAnderson, C.A. and Bowman, M.J. (eds.) Education and EconomicDevelopment, Chicago, Aldine, 1965.

Fuller, W. "More Evidence Supporting the Demise of Pre-employmentVocational Trade Training: A Case Study of a Factory in India,"Comparative Education Review, Vo. 20, No. 1, 1976.

Grubb W. N. "The Phoenix of Vocational Education: Implications forEvaluation," in The Planning Paper for the Vocational EducationStudy, Washington, D.C., National Institute of Education, 1979,195-215.

Grubb, W.N., "The Convergence of Educational Systems and the Role ofVocationalism," Comparative Education Review, 29, 4 (November1985): 526-548.

Gustman, A.L., and Steinmeier, T.L., "The Relation Between VocationalTraining in High School and Economic Outcomes," National Bureauof Economic Research, Working Paper No. 642, 1981.

Harma, R., "The Farmer Enterpreneur and his Prerequisite prior Educationin Agricultural Development, The World Bank, 1979 (mimeo).

l- 31 -

Hinchliffe, K. "Cost Structures of Secondary Schooling in Tanzania andColombia," Education Department, The World Bank, Washington,D.C., 1983.

Hu, T.W., Studies of the Cost-Efficiency and Cost-Effectiveness ofVocational Education, National Center for Research in VocationalEducation, Ohio State University, Information Series No. 202,1980.

Jamison, D. and Lau, L., Farm Education and Farm Efficiency, Johns HopkinsUniversity Press, 1982.

Jimenez, E., Kugler, B. and Horn, R., "An Economic Eva].uation of a NationalJob Training System: Colombia's Servicio Nacional de Appredizaje(SENA). Education and Training Department, the World Bank(1986).

King, A. "Educational Needs of Society in Transition, European Journal ofEducation, Vol. 20, Nos. 2-3, 1985: 233-43.

Lauglo, J. "Concepts of 'General Education' and 'VocatJonal Education'Curricula for Post-compulsory Schooling in Western IndustrilizedCountries: When Should the Twain Meet?" Com:parative Education,Vol. 19, No. 3, 1983.

Lauglo, J. "Practical Subjects in Academic Secondary Schools: AnEvaluation of Industrial Education in Kenya," Institute ofEducation, University of London, 1985 (mimeo).

McGinn, N.F., and Bolart, E.T., "Una Evaluacion de la Educacion MediaTechnica en El Salvador," Revista Latinoamericana de EstudiosEducativos, Vol. X, No. 2, 1980.

Munoz Izquierdo, C. and Rodriguez, P. "La Ensenanza Tecnica: Canal deMovilidad Social para los Trabajadores?" ReviLsta Latinoamerica deEstudios Educativos, 1980: 1-28, 10, 3.

Narman, A., Hildesson, C., Sjolund, H. and Soderstrom J., "What Happens toKenyan Secondary School Students with Industrial Education: ATracer Study One Year After the KCE-Exam 1983," University ofGothenburg, 1984 (mimeo), Table 3.1.

Nazareth, A. "Microcomputer Simulation: Economics in Curricula Choice (ECCModel)", Economic Development Institute, The World Bank, 1985(mimeo).

Nystrom, D. and Hennessy, J. "Cost Differential Analysis: Providing Datafor Added Cost Funding," Journal of Industrial TeacherEducation, 1985: 53-61.

- 32 -

Oxtoby, R., "Vocational Education and Development Planning: EmergingIssues in the Commonwealth Caribbean," Comparative Education,Vol. 13, No. 3, 1977.

Psacharopoulos, G. and Zabalza, A., "The Effect of Diversified Schools inEmployment Status and Earnings in Colombia," Economics ofEducation Review, Vol. 3, No. 4, 1984: 315-331.

Psacharopoulos, G., "An Evaluation of Curriculum Diversification inColombia and Tanzania," Comparative Education Review, 29, 4,1985a: 507-525.

Psacharopoulos, G., "Returns to Education: A Further Internation Updateand Implications," Journal'of Human Resources, XX, 4, Fall 1985b:583-604 (and Appendix B, available from the author).

Psacharopoulos, G., Higher Education in Developing Countries: ACost-Benefit Analysis. The World Bank, Staff Working Paper No.440, 1980.

Sullivan, G., "Secondary School Leavers and the Labor Market in Swaziland,"International Journal of Educational Development, Vol. 1,September 1981.

Taussig, M.K., "An Economic Analysis of Vocational Education in the NewYork City High Schools," Journal of Human Resources 3(Supplement) 1968.

Urquidi, V.L., "Technical Education in Mexico: A Preliminary Appraisal,"Prospects, XII, No. 1, 1982: 115-22.

Urevbu, A.O., "Vocational Education in Nigeria: A Preliminary Appraisal"International Journal of Educational Development, Vol. 4, No. 3,pp. 223-29, 1984.

Vulliamy, G., SSCEP and High School Outstations: A Case Study, ERU ResearchReport No. 33, University of Papua New Guinea, 1980.

Wanasinghe, J., "A Critical Examination of the Failure of the JuniorSecondary School Curriculum and Pre-Vocational Studies in SriLanka," International Journal of Educational Development, 1982,2(1):61-72.

Weisberg, A., 'What Research Has to Say About Vocational Education in theHigh Schools," Phi Delta Kappa, 33, 1983, 335-359.

Wilms, W.W., "The Dubious Promise of Post-Secondary Vocational Education:Its Payoff to Dropouts and Graduates in the USA," InternationalJournal of Educational Development, 2, 1982: 43-59.

Zachariah, M. and Hoffman, A., "Ghandhi and Mao on Manual Labor in theSchool: A Retrospective Analysis," International Review ofEducation, Vol XXXI, 1985: pp. 265-282.

- 33 -

Appendix-Table A-1

Annual Direct Unit Cost by School Type and Curriculum:Colombia, 1981 (Pesos)

Diversified TraditionalCurriculum (INEM) School.s Schools Overall

Academic 25,700 22,200 23,950Agricultural 26,200 33,700 29,950Commercial 25,210 23,200 24,200Industrial 25,300 31,900 28,600

Note: Cost refers to public schools only and includesschool-related expenses by students.

Source: Psacharopoulos (1985a), p.513.

Appendix Table A-2

Annual Unit Cost by Curriculum Bias:Tanzania, 1981

Annual Unit CostCurriculum Bias (Shillings)

Academic 2,888Agricultural 3,449Technical 3,263 3,291Commercial 3,160 ._

Note: Cost refers to public schools only.Source: Psacharopoulos (1985a), p. 514.

- 34 -

Appendix Table A-3

Building Cost per Secondary School Student Place:Kenya, 1984

Cost perSubject Place Index

Industrial (Metal, Wood, 1,375 550Power, Electricity)

Regular classroom 250 100

Source: Lauglo (1985), Table XII-4.

Appendix Table A-4

The Secondary Level Unit Cost Structure by Curriculum Type

Country Secondary General Vocationalas a whole

El Salvador 100 77 152Malaysia ' 100 n.a. 350Papua New Guinea 100 n.a. 321Philippines 100 97 128Indonesia a/ 100 68 132Honduras 100 20 146Sierra Leone 100 44 155Selected Asiancountries a/ 100 70 130

Source: Psacharopoulos (1980), Table 5.3

Note: Cost refers to recurrent expenditure unless otherwiseindicate.a/ Refers to capital expenditure.

- 35 -

Appendix Table A-5

Annual Cost per Student/Subject Period,Malaysia, 1984

Subject Unit Cost Index(in US$)

Arts & Crafts .44 163Physics, Chemistry, Biology .56 207Mathematics .29 107Geography, History .25 93Commerce .44 163English .27 100

Source: Nazareth (1985)

Note: Figures include capital and recurrent costs andrefer to Forms I to V in a comprehensive secondaryschool.

Appendix Table A-6

Cost of Furniture and Equipment,Malaysia Secondary Schools, 1984

CostClassroom Type (in US$) Index

General workshop 98,000 8,167

Biology, Science, Physics 5,600 467

Regular classroom 1,200 100

Source: Nazareth (1985)

- 36 -

Appendix Table A-7

Annual Cost per Student/Subject Period,Barbados, 1984

Subject Unit Cost Index(in US$)

Technical Drawing 1.28 191Commerce 1.06 158Industrial Arts .95 142Agricultural Science .93 139Science .77 115Mathematics .70 104English .67 100

Source: Nazareth (1985)Note: Refers to diversified secondary schools

Grades 7 to 11.

Appendix Table A-8

Cost of Furniture and Equipment,Barbados Secondary Schools, 1984

CostClassroom Type (in US$) Index

Technical drawing room 45,200 1,222Commerce room 40,000 1,081Industrial Arts 25,700 695Art room 13,400 362Science laboratory 9,000 243Crafts room 7,000 189

Regular classroom 3,700 100

Source: Nazareth (1985)

Note: Refers to Grades 7 to 11.

- 37 -

Appendix Table A-9

Annual Cost per Student/Subject Period,China, 1984

Subject Unit Cost Index(in Y)

Chinese language .10 100English .09 90Algebra .10 100Physics, Chemistry .14 140Biology .16 160

Source: Nazareth (1985)

Note: Refers to lower middle urban schools.

Appendix Table A-10

Cost of Furniture and Equipment,China, 1984.

CostClassroom Type (in Y ) Index

Science laboratory 12,000 480Ordinary classroom 2,500 100

Source: Nazareth (1985)

Note: Refers to lower middle school.

- 38 -

Appendix Table A-l1

Annual Cost per Student/Subject Period,Jordan, 1984

Subject Unit Cost Index(in US$)

Arabic language .30English language .28Mathematics .30 100History .28Geography .33General Science .57Biology .48 _

Chemistry & Industrial .63Chemistry

Industrial Organization .53and Technology

Industrial Drawing .39 196Basic Shop training .94General Mechanics .93Electricity utility .84.Metal workshop .71Woodwork .72

Source: Nazareth (1985)Note: Refers to comprehensive secondary school, grades

10, 11, and 12.

- 39 -

Appendix Table A-12

Cost of Furniture and Equipment,Jordan Secondary Schools, 1984

CostClassroom Type (in US$) Index

Electrical workshop 86,300Metal workshop 53,700 614Wood workshop 62,300Mechanics workshop 102,100 _Biology laboratory 15,700Chemical laboratory 21,500 203Physical laboratory 26,800General Science laboratory 36,800 _Ordinary classroom 12,400 100

Source: Nazareth (1985)

- 40 -

Appendix Table A-13

The Returns to Higher Education by Subject (percent)

Country Year Subject Social Private

Belgium 1967 Economics 9.5Law 6.0Sciences 8.0Medicine 11.5

Brazil 1962 Economics 16.1Law 17.4Medicine 11.9Engineering 17.3Agriculture 5.2

Canada 1967 Economics 9.0 16.3Engineering 2.0 4.5

Colombia 1976 Economics 26.2 32.7Engineering 24.8 33.7Medicine 23.7 35.6Law 22.7 28.3Agronomy 16.4 22.3

Denmark 1964 Economics 9.0Law 10.0Engineering 8.0Medicine 5.0

France 1970 Law and Economics 16.7Sciences 12.3

Greece 1977 Physics & Math. 1.8 2.1Agronomy 2.7 3.1Law 12.0 13.8Engineering 8.2 12.2Econ. & Politics 4.4 5.4

Great Britain 1967 Arts 13.5Social Sciences 13.0Engineering 11.4Sciences 11.0

1971 Arts 7.0 26.0Sciences 7.0 38.0Eng. & Techn. 6.0 32.0Social Science 11.0 48.0

India 1961 Humanities 12.7 14.3Engineering 16.6 21.2

Iran 1964 Economics 18.5 23.9Humanities 15.3 20.0Engineering 18.2 30.7Agriculture 13.8 27.4

Malaysia 1968 Engineering 13.4Medicine 12.4Agriculture 9.8

Cont'd

- 41

Appendix Table A-13 (Cont'd)

Country Year Subject Social Private

Norway 1966 Economics 8.9Law 10.6Arts 4.3Engineering 8.7Sciencies 6.2Medicine 3.1Agriculture 2.2

Philippines 1969 Economics 10.5 14.0Law 15.0 18.0Engineering 8.0 15.0Agriculture 5.0 5.0

Sweden 1967 Economics 9.0Law 9.5Medicine 13.CEngineering 7.5

Source: Psacharopoulos (1985b), Table A-3.

- 42 -

Appendix Table A-14

Cost per Student by University in Portugal, 1979

Recurrent costper student(in escudos)

University of Coimbra 46,498University of Lisboa (classical) 26,177University of Porto 37,637Technical University of Lisboa 37,505Non-university higher education a/ 42,274

Notes: a/ The Institutions are: Instituto Superior de Engeneriado Porto, Coimbra and Lisoba; Higher Institute ofAcconting and Administration in Coimbra, Porto, Aveiroand Lisboa; Practical Agricultural School of Sentaria,Evora and Coimbra; Higher Institute of BusinessStudies.

Source: Psacharopoulos (1980), Table 5.4.