© Vincent Isore
At the professional high school Chennevière Malézieux in Paris in December.
Specialist ofvocational educationthe sociologist Fabienne Maillard, university professor at Paris-VIII, looks back on its evolution, from its creation with the aim of training worker-citizens to its use as a means of relegation of pupils in difficulty who must school until they are 16 years old.
Why and in what context was the vocational route created?
It was created at the end of the 19th century to meet economic needs. After two industrial revolutions, there is a need for workers, foremen, skilled employees, and there are great shortages of skilled labour. It is also a State initiative to enable professionalization associated with general knowledge and a general culture. There is a humanist ambition on the part of the state to prevent the bosses alone from forming the workforce, so that future workers can also be citizens, not just producers.
How has it evolved?
Until the 1960s, it was a selective, Malthusian path, from which graduates easily entered the job market and were able to pursue real upward careers – some became engineers at the time of the Trente Glorieuses. And then, at the end of the 1950s, at the beginning of the 1960s, it was integrated into the school system, it lost its autonomy and became a path of relegation for undesirable pupils from the general path. At the same time, it contributes to the massification of secondary education: political leaders include all young people who have a little difficult behavior, school difficulties, and who must be kept in school until the age of 16.
Politicians on all sides often show their desire to make it a “path of excellence”. Are these beautiful words?
All the policies carried out have contributed to the discredit of the professional path for a very long time. The vocational studies certificate (BEP), for example, has recently disappeared [l’an passé, ndlr], when it was the most important degree. Those in charge do not have a continuous policy in the professional path and instrumentalize it a lot in the management of school flows.
Is the professional path in line with the needs of the market?
The diplomas are built with the social partners, so we cannot blame the Ministry of National Education for the way in which they are designed. Nevertheless, according to the political leaders, the taking into account of the speeches of the social partners is unequal and the question of the management of flows [d’élèves] may supersede skill-up targets. The least costly for the regions and the State is the tertiary sector (administration, commerce, etc.), so we put lots of students. But these are students who have not necessarily chosen to be there and who are not necessarily expected on the labor market. Lots of young girls are sent to the secretariat because there was no more room in the training they wanted. There are very ambitious training courses that allow easy access to employment, and others less so. It’s very uneven.
