Volume 3,Issue 9
Comparative Study of TVET Education System in China and Finland
This study compares how China and Finland structure and implement technical and vocational education and training (TVET). Although China has expanded vocational programs to support industrial upgrading, the sector still operates under limited social recognition, uneven cooperation with industry, and a legal framework that has not fully kept pace with reforms. Finland, on the other hand, has built a more integrated TVET model with flexible movement between vocational and general tracks and a long-established apprenticeship system, supported by stable national policies. Recent financial cuts, however, and gaps in teachers’ practical experience have created new pressures within the Finnish system. By examining these differences, the study points to several directions for improving China’s TVET development, particularly in legislation, school–industry collaboration, and teacher preparation. The comparison offers insights for policymakers seeking to strengthen TVET’s contribution to national development.
[1] Widianingsih I, Purwaamijaya I M, Dwiyanti V, 2018, Vocational education: assessment, classification and the realm of research developments. Innovation of Vocational Technology Education, 14(2): 85.
[2] Hanushek E A, Woessmann L, Zhang L, 2016, General education, vocational education, and labor-market outcomes over the lifecycle. Journal of Human Resources, 52(1): 48-87.
[3] Kiyanova L D, Litvinenko I L, Лаптев С В, et al., 2018, Socioeconomic and management aspects of the system of vocational guidance for learners with disabilities. Journal of History Culture and Art Research, 7(1): 341.
[4] Valach L, Young R A, 2009, Interdisciplinarity in vocational guidance: an action theory perspective. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 9(2): 85-99.
[5] Eichhörst W, Rodríguez-Planas N, Schmidl R, et al., 2015, A road map to vocational education and training in industrialized countries. ILR Review, 68(2): 314-337.
[6] Evans J, Repper J, 2000, Employment, social inclusion and mental health. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 7(1): 15-24.
[7] Furuhagen B, Holmén J, Säntti J, 2019, ‘The ideal teacher: Orientations of teacher education in Sweden and Finland after the Second World War’. History of Education, 48 (6): 1–22.
[8] Li J, Eryong X, 2020, Unveiling the‘logic’ of modern university in China: Historical, social and value perspectives. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 52(9): 986–998.
[9] Li J, Xue E, 2021, Returnee Faculty Responses to Internationalizing ‘Academic Ecology’ for Creating World-class Universities in China’ Elite Universities. Higher Education, 81(5): 1063–1078.
[10] Li P, Shi W, 2020, Policy ideal and action path of type reform of vocational education in china—content analysis and implementation prospect of national vocational education reform implementation plan. Higher Education Administration, 14(01): 106–114.
[11] Niemi A M, Jahnukainen M, 2020, Educating self-governing learners and employees: studying, learning and pedagogical practices in the context of vocational education and its reform. Journal of Youth Studies, 23(9): 1143–1160.
[12] Ross J A, Bruce C D, 2007, “Teacher Self-assessment: A Mechanism for Facilitating Professional Growth.” Teaching and Teacher Education, 23: 146–159.
[13] Wang L, Ross H, 2013, Vocational Education (I): Current Issues and Challenges. Chinese Education & Society, 46(4): 3–11.
[14] Xue E, Li J, 2022, Exploring the type-based vocational education system: Insights from China. Educational Philosophy & Theory, 54(10): 1670–1680.
[15] Rintala H, Nokelainen P, 2020, Standing and attractiveness of vocational education and training in Finland: Focus on learning environments. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 72(2): 250-269.