ABSTRACT
In Germany strongly institutionalised transition structures post-16 provide broadly based foundation training designed to produce educated workers and citizens. Criticisms of narrowness are offset by post-hoc attempts to broaden the curriculum by ‘entitlements’ and ‘transferable skills’ which occupy an ambiguous and weak place in the curriculum, and are not comparable in breadth or depth to the general education provided at centre stage in many European countries. In the move from enlargement to inclusion, and from key skills to educated attributes, the workplace cannot be the ‘ultimate curriculum authority’ and neither can the ‘academy’. The idea that a curriculum based on bundles of core and vocational skills combined with action planning will equip young people for the future is wholly inadequate. In Britain, transition structures are weakly institutionalised, and post-compulsory education and training arrangements reflect historically embedded narrowness and divisions, with the ‘elite’ Advanced level and the narrowly based National Vocational Qualifications exemplifying the academic/vocational divide.
