Print version Recommend this page Press release
02/ 2008
Bonn, 16.01.2008
Discontinuation of the trainer examination requirement: More training places - Lower training quality
The temporary suspension of the Ordinance on Trainer Aptitude (AEVO) has led to an increase in the number of training places on offer and an increase in the number of enterprises offering in-house vocational training. These increases however have been smaller than expected. At the same time, there are signs that this new arrangement which was passed on 3 May 2003 is having a negative impact on the quality of the training being provided. A clear majority of the surveyed enterprises feels that the AEVO makes a significant contribution to ensuring that training personnel has earned at least a minimum level of qualification and to ensuring the quality of vocational training as a whole. These are the fundamental findings of a study that the Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training (BIBB) conducted in cooperation with the Bonn-based SALSS research group from October 2006 to November 2007. The findings from this study have been published in German in the latest edition of BIBB REPORT.
The AEVO - which parts of trade and industry have called a bureaucratic hurdle - was suspended with the aim of making it easier for enterprises to get involved in providing in-house vocational training. Following this change in law, trainers of individuals with a training contract that is in force or is concluded between 1 August 2003 and 31 July 2008 no longer have to prove their qualification pursuant to the AEVO. In other words, they no longer have to have passed a special examination. The findings from the study conducted on behalf of the Federal Ministry of Education and Research are based on two surveys: a representative nationwide survey of some 15,000 firms and a survey of Chambers of Skilled Trades and Chambers of Industry and Commerce.
More firms offering in-house training - More training places
According to the findings from the company survey, the number of enterprises that say the suspension of the AEVO has made it easier to get involved in providing in-house vocational training or made it possible to offer training for more trainees lies between 7,000 and 10,000 a year.
The number of training places whose provision was facilitated by the suspension of the AEVO ranges from 10,000 to 25,000 a year.
The responses from the companies surveyed should not however be interpreted as meaning that the change in the AEVO was the only reason that these firms decided to provide in-house vocational training.
The companies that could be induced to provide in-house training for the first time or to provide more training places were primarily small enterprises with one to nine employees (67%) or with ten to 19 employees (28%). A breakdown by sector shows that the suspension of the AEVO has mainly benefited service companies (38%) and commercial enterprises (28%).
More drop-outs
The qualitative effects had by the suspension of the AEVO can be observed notably with regard to training success (completion of training). The findings from the company survey show that the drop-out rate - irrespective of company size or sector of the economy - is higher in those companies that do not have personnel who have earned qualification pursuant to the AEVO and that indicated in the survey that the suspension of the AEVO made it easier for them to get involved in providing in-house vocational training. These firms also complain more frequently of difficulties in this connection and that their trainees have lower examination grades.
This finding generally tallies with the finding from the chamber survey where nearly half of the training consultants felt that the suspension of the AEVO has led to a drop in quality and has hurt the image of vocational training.
It must also be remembered here that there may be other causes for training success or failure, such as the respective individual's 'learning biography', level of motivation and family background.
AEVO as a quality assurance tool
Three quarters (77%) of the training consultants at the chambers are of the opinion that the AEVO should be reinstated. At the same time, a clear majority (65%) advocate revising the AEVO before reinstating it. Twelve per cent say that the AEVO should be reinstated unchanged. Only 3% would like to see it repealed entirely, while 18% would like to see the suspension extended.
The opinions of the surveyed enterprises were more diverse: A majority of companies that provide in-house training and companies that do not provide in-house training feel that regulating trainer aptitude helps ensure minimum qualification levels among training personnel and contributes to maintaining the quality of vocational training as a whole. On the other hand, approximately one out of every two enterprises feels that many firms cannot meet the costs this entails and 44% consider government regulation to be a bureaucratic hurdle for companies wanting to get involved in providing in-house vocational training.
The current German-language issue of BIBB REPORT can be downloaded free of charge from
www.bibb.de/bibbreport
Point of contact at BIBB for further information:
Philipp Ulmer, Tel.: 0228 / 107-1413; E-mail: ulmer@bibb.de
