Challenges in the Transition From Apprenticeships to Higher Education in England, Germany, and Norway

Social Inclusion 2025 •Volume 13 •Article 9774 https://doi.org/10.17645/si.9774 ARTICLE Open Access Journal Challenges in the Transition From Apprenticeships to Higher Education in England, Germany, and Norway Johannes Karl Schmees 1, Tim Migura 2, Bill Esmond 1, Dietmar Frommberger 2, and Eli Smeplass 3 1Institute of Education & Skills, University of Derby, UK 2Institute of Education, Vocational and Business Education, Osnabrück University, Germany 3Faculty of Social and Educational Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway Correspondence: Tim Migura ([email protected]) Submitted: 14 December 2024 Accepted: 30 July 2025 Published: 10 September 2025 Issue: This article is part of the issue “Vocational Schools as Pathways to Higher Education: International Perspectives” edited by Christian Imdorf (Leibniz University Hannover / Bulgarian Academy of Sciences), Claudia Schuchart (University of Wuppertal), and Nadine Bernhard (Technische Universität Berlin), fully open access at https://doi.org/10.17645/si.i423 Abstract The transition from technical and vocational education and training to higher education is particularly challenging for apprenticeship graduates. These challenges are not only bureaucratic or logistical but also reflect deeper systemic inequalities. In many countries, apprenticeship routes at the upper secondary level are disproportionately chosen by disadvantaged groups in relation to class, gender, and/or race. As a result, the limited, time‐consuming, and inconsistently regulated progression pathways in place contribute to the reproduction of social inequality. This article examines how such structural barriers are embedded in three national apprenticeship models in England, Germany, and Norway, where access to apprenticeship qualifications is primarily mediated by the labour market. In England, higher‐level apprenticeship routes combine company‐based learning with part‐time participation in institutional education. In Germany, the parallel or “dual” model integrates school‐based and company‐based training, while Norway’s sequential model structures apprenticeships as successive phases in schools and workplaces. In comparing these models, we conclude that despite differences across transition routes and claims to improve permeability, the divide between vocational and academic education persists across all three systems, thereby reinforcing rather than reducing systemic inequality. Keywords case study; comparative analysis; cross‐national; higher education; pathways; permeability; transition; TVET © 2025 by the author(s), licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY). 1 1. Introduction Discussions on permeability mostly refer to the transition from technical and vocational education and training (TVET) to higher education. This is why the Austrian berufsbildende höhere Schule (vocational college), which combines a TVET qualification with a higher education entrance qualification, is considered the “best practice” (Deißinger et al., 2013, p. 8). However, transitions between TVET and an increasingly stratified higher education system are not necessarily developing as smoothly in the context of apprenticeships, which require substantive workplace training (Frommberger, 2019; Sender & Kriesi, 2021). By contrast with vocational schooling that may provide additional university preparation, apprenticeship graduates have been prepared explicitly for working life and therefore face disadvantages when attempting to transition to academic pathways. In many countries, apprenticeship routes are not only considered dichotomous to academic education, but they are also structurally and symbolically positioned as inferior. These routes often serve students from working‐class or otherwise marginalised backgrounds, compounding issues of educational inequality. Consequently, the promise of equal opportunity through education remains unfulfilled for many apprenticeship graduates, raising critical questions about how education systems reproduce, rather than resolve, social divisions. Additionally, the higher education destinations are often of comparatively low value and may be seen as diverting or discouraging students from authentic higher education rather than as modes of access (Boliver, 2015; Brint & Karabel, 1989; Grubbs, 2020). Therefore, this article investigates the extent to which education systems support or hinder progression from apprenticeships to higher education, with apprenticeships defined as educational routes where access to qualifications is mediated by the labour market (Esmond, 2020; Fuller & Unwin, 2009). The challenges and obstacles that persist throughout the transition from apprenticeships are closely monitored. In this article, we analyse options for permeability into higher education for apprenticeship graduates at upper secondary level—level 4 of the European Qualification Framework (EQF). A comparative approach is applied across countries that have different apprenticeship structures implemented. Our goal with this study is twofold: firstly, we aim to illustrate the common barriers encountered across different countries and, secondly, to highlight the differences in permeability between these countries. The central question posed in this article addresses the issue of equality between TVET, on the one hand, and general/higher education on the other. For apprenticeship graduates, access to higher education can be constrained by limited pathways and perplexing regulatory frameworks (Knight et al., 2022; for Germany, see Freitag et al., 2011; for Norway, see Schmees et al., 2024). These individuals may face marginalisation or rejection by (traditional) universities during the admissions process (Coulson et al., 2017; Jones et al., 2019; Pilz, 2019) and may possess inadequate academic skills due to the circumscribed nature of their school‐based education (Spöttl, 2013, p. 466). Vocational expertise is frequently regarded as inconsequential within higher education settings (Gale, 2022). Simultaneously, level 4 EQF apprenticeship pathways are pursued by marginalised groups, in numerous countries, particularly in terms of class, gender, and/or race. Consequently, these individuals encounter additional forms of discrimination. Therefore, apprenticeship holders are, from a structural, organisational, and individual perspective, most likely not to progress into higher education despite increasing permeability claims. At the structural level, student access to higher education marks the central concept that widens or closes possibilities for permeability between TVET and higher education (e.g., Bernhard, 2019, pp. 132–134). However, even in countries where TVET is regarded as relatively prestigious, such as Austria, Germany, and Social Inclusion •2025 •Volume 13 •Article 9774 2 Switzerland, access from apprenticeships to higher education is the exception rather than the rule. The concept behind the expression “equivalent not equal” (for Germany, see Eckelt, 2016, chapter 6.3; for Austria and Germany, see Schwabe‐Ruck & Schlögl, 2014) has been used to legitimise obstacles and time‐wasting that vocationally qualified students face when pursuing academic qualifications. The implementation of the EQF has resulted in the establishment of eight distinct levels of qualifications. Level 4 represents a qualification in upper secondary education, Level 5 an intermediate qualification, and levels 6, 7, and 8 correspond to bachelor’s, master’s, and PhD qualifications, respectively. This has served to further clarify the distinction between vocational and general/academic education. In Germany, for instance, it is possible to progress from EQF level 4 in general education to academic education at EQF level 6. However, this progression is significantly restricted for vocationally qualified students who are at the same EQF level. Furthermore, the progression is rendered even more challenging for those who possess an apprenticeship qualification, thereby supporting claims that permeability is more restricted for those who qualify from more work‐related forms of TVET (Frommberger, 2019, pp. 24–25). At the organisational level, recognition of prior learning (RPL) as well as the connections between TVET and higher education institutions are central to enable permeability (Bernhard, 2019, pp. 132–134). In England, for instance, despite a long‐standing tradition of RPL in TVET, progression into higher education, which is usually from general education, tends to emphasise direct links to the study destination. It is inevitable that progressions from apprenticeships, which are more oriented to industry expectations, will not align in the same way. The “connections between TVET and higher education institutions” refer to models where the transfer from TVET to higher education is implemented through cooperating institutions in the sense that a vocational school, college, or workplace learning are closely connected to higher education to enable students’ progression (Frommberger & Schmees, 2022). However, forms of hybridisation often fail to acknowledge workplace learning. Exceptionally, cooperative studies, often also referred to as dual studies, are degree programmes in Germany that combine work placements with higher education. But also, for these programmes, access is not guaranteed to apprenticeship holders at EQF level 4, illustrating that without student access, permeability has little meaning. Students graduating from cooperative studies programmes, in turn, face difficulties by themselves if they plan to progress into a master’s or doctoral programme at a traditional university. While there are alternative options to obtain a master’s degree also at a university of applied sciences or a cooperative studies university, the degree‐awarding power for a doctorate is, in general, restricted to universities alone (Behrenbeck, 2022; Meurer, 2018; Schmees, 2022). At the individual level, the majority of students enrolled in TVET in most countries are from working‐class backgrounds (Avis & Atkins, 2017). It has been demonstrated that institutions of higher education, most notably those of a prestigious reputation, either refuse to accept these students (Coulson et al., 2017; Jones et al., 2019) or are not prepared for the diversity that follows their admission (Reay et al., 2009). Additionally, vocational knowledge is frequently not recognised by the more prestigious and well‐resourced institutions that determine what is of value in higher education, whilst being its providers (Gale, 2022). It is evident that apprenticeship schemes exhibit a heightened prevalence of underprivileged individuals and a pronounced emphasis on vocational expertise when compared to the broader context of TVET. It can be claimed that the higher education destinations of apprenticeship graduates, due to the reasons mentioned, are likely to be less prestigious forms of higher education. The potential for an individual to benefit from the structural permeability mechanisms is contingent upon the assessment of appropriateness by the gatekeepers (Banscherus et al., 2016, p. 9; Schröder & Dehnbostel, 2019). Social Inclusion •2025 •Volume 13 •Article 9774 3 The barriers on the structural, organisational, and individual levels delineated above form the background of our investigation of transitions from apprenticeships to higher education. In order to comprehend the intricacies of these barriers at different levels and their multiple interactions in the diverse case studies of England, Germany, and Norway, potential transition pathways are initially identified and then discussed, supported by secondary data and/or statistics. 2. Methodology Taking a comparative approach enables us to look beyond national explanations and reveal the structural patterns that influence the permeability between vocational and higher education in different systems. By examining three countries with distinct apprenticeship models and higher education systems, we can identify how formal progression opportunities are influenced by underlying institutional factors, such as the symbolic value of vocational knowledge, the stratification of higher education, and the impact of policy on access. This perspective enables us to look beyond context‐specific barriers and interrogate whether educational reforms genuinely expand social mobility—or merely reproduce existing hierarchies in new forms. The primary research method is a comparative case study analysis (Kroon & Sturm, 2007) between England, Germany, and Norway. In this approach, the cases are firstly analysed in‐depth before a comparison is carried out. These cases were selected based on their distinct (and different) apprenticeship structures, which provide a diverse set of cases for comparison (Gerring, 2007, p. 89). This allows us to consider the impact of different apprenticeship models on the transition to higher education. This way, we are able to detect variations due to the design of the apprenticeship models. Our data basis comprises education reports, government documents, national statistics, and academic research. We, therefore, refer to the different designs of apprenticeship models in England, Germany, and Norway comparatively. In England, apprenticeship routes are increasingly fragmented, combining company‐based learning with institution‐based studies in varying ways across occupational orientations and levels of study (Esmond, 2020; Esmond & Atkins, 2022). In Germany, the dual apprenticeship can be characterised as a parallel company‐based and school‐based structure (Frommberger & Schmees, 2024). And, in Norway, the sequential model consists of successive phases in school and corporations (Smeplass & Schmees, 2023; Virolainen & Tønder, 2018). In all three cases, apprenticeships at EQF level 4 represent the initial qualification from which the possible transition pathways to higher education are analysed. Finally, our analysis takes into account different routes from apprenticeship to higher education. As indicated in prior studies (Frommberger & Schmees, 2024; Schmees et al., 2024), systems usually provide multiple routes to higher education. In order to systematise those routes, we imply a vertically and horizontally organised structure of the education system (Wilbers, 2014, p. 21). The vertical structure is indicated, for example, by different levels of qualifications and the horizontal structure by different education subsystems with different aims and contents, for example, TVET, general/higher education, and increasingly hybrid forms (for the latter, see Schmees, 2022). When transitioning from apprenticeships to higher education, we can then distinguish horizontal, vertical, and lateral transitions (Hemkes, 2018; Hemkes & Wilbers, 2019; Wilbers, 2014). Horizontal transitions refer to pathways where another qualification on the same qualification level is done in another educational subsystem. Vertical transitions refer to transitions to a higher qualification level but in the very same education subsystem. Finally, lateral transitions refer to a Social Inclusion •2025 •Volume 13 •Article 9774 4 combined transition (horizontally and vertically) at the same time. Then, three different routes from apprenticeships to higher education can be traced (see Figure 1): 1. Diagonal routes from apprenticeships to higher education (lateral transitions); 2. Routes via higher TVET qualifications (vertical transition + horizontal transition); 3. Routes via general education (in Germany, however, as part of the school‐based TVET system) on the same qualification level, that have to be added to the existing apprenticeship qualification before entering higher education (horizontal transition + vertical transition). Higher TVET EQF level 5/6/7 EQF level 4 Higher educa on TVET Higher TVET qualifica on Higher educa on qualifica on Appren ceship qualifica on Geral educa on qualifica ons General educa on 3 3 2 2 1 Figure 1. Conceptualisation of the three routes into higher education. The following sections present the three country case studies. After a brief introduction to the national context, the case‐specific transition pathways from apprenticeships (EQF level 4) to higher education are described in the context of the heuristic model. Finally, each case study will discuss how the possibilities of transferring from apprenticeships to higher education are contributing to educational mobility. Table 1 provides an overview of the transition paths identified in the case studies. Within the case studies, we present applied versions of Figure 1, except for the case of England, as the degree apprenticeship is at the same time a potential way into higher education, as it is itself a higher education programme already. Table 1. Important pathways from TVET to higher education. Cases Route 1 (diagonal) Route 2 (higher TVET) Route 3 (general education) England Degree apprenticeship (combined higher education n.a. and higher apprenticeship qualification) Germany Work experience plus admission test Higher TVET (Aufstiegsfortbildung) Fachoberschule (FOS)/Berufsoberschule (BOS) Norway Y Pathway or 23/5 rule TVET college (Fagskole) Supplementary programme Social Inclusion •2025 •Volume 13 •Article 9774 5 3. England: Innovation or Re‐Drawing Barriers? In England, the recent innovation of “degree apprenticeships,” which combine a degree with certified higher‐level work experience (and sometimes professional qualifications), appears to have provided a route to higher education for apprentices. This has been hailed by policymakers as a success; yet this apparent triumph is deceptive. Simply put, progression to these studies predominantly occurs from substantially different educational routes and different social groups than the working‐class young people who dominate apprenticeships at EQF level 4. Instead, degree apprenticeships widely attract senior staff, such as managers and professionals who are already employed. In this sense, we can identify English degree apprenticeships not as a successful route from TVET into higher education, but as an alternative route into higher education for those who have already achieved some degree of mobility within the workforce. Alternatively, the recruitment of less academically successful young people directly into degree apprenticeships, promoted by some universities, can be described as a diversion (Brint & Karabel, 1989) from conventional higher education for direct entrants. Apprenticeships in England include a wide range of substantially different provisions. The most self‐evident distinction is by level (from EQF level 3 to postgraduate level). The higher levels include: higher‐level apprenticeships, usually at EQF level 5 (sub‐bachelor), and degree apprenticeships at bachelor’s and postgraduate levels. The current structure of apprenticeships has been determined by legislation rather than by industry needs, although some employers have been involved in the design of qualifications by so‐called “trailblazer groups” that have brought educators and other stakeholders together to design them. Neither the level, length, nor associated qualifications are determined in advance of this design process. Moreover, these qualifications differ even at the same level: an apprenticeship in engineering at EQF level 4 can include a two‐year college course, leading to an upper‐secondary qualification, alongside work experience; a course in hairdressing or beauty therapy is more likely to be provided entirely in the workplace (Esmond, 2020). The apprenticeship standard mandates that apprentices be given 20% of their time as “off‐the‐job training,” but there are no strict requirements as to what this includes or where it takes place (Esmond, 2020). Apprenticeships in England have long been distinguishable as a less favourable TVET route than in other European countries, such as Germany. During the early post‐war period, they provided an option for low‐attaining young people seeking to leave school early to enter the labour market, with apprenticeships combining full‐time work and part‐time day or evening study; apart from small numbers of engineering apprentices progressing to part‐time “higher national certificates” in their final year, questions of higher‐level progression hardly arose. The divide between sectors widened with the explosion of youth unemployment in the 1980s, as apprenticeships became the name given to competency‐based qualifications offered by a private training market (Fuller & Unwin, 2009). By contrast, over the same period, higher education expanded from participation below 20% to over 40% of the age cohort, the beneficiaries including lower‐achieving middle‐class youth in schools and further education colleges (Hodgson & Spours, 2015; K. Orr, 2020). Consequently, apprenticeships have lost much of their former character as a direct entry route to work, supported by educational provision that could provide a platform for more senior roles in the workforce at a later stage. Social Inclusion •2025 •Volume 13 •Article 9774 6 3.1. Introduction of Apprenticeship‐Only Pathways More recent attempts to introduce apprenticeship routes at higher levels have had a difficult history. Entry into English higher education through an apprenticeship route first took the form of “higher level” apprenticeship (Dismore, 2014). Motivated by a government drive towards quasi‐market diversity, including the encouragement of private providers, its introduction was seen as an alternative to full‐time bachelor’s degrees, which had long remained the main mode of study in English higher education (Higher Education Funding Council for England, 2010; National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education, 1997). The numbers on these courses remained low compared to part‐time higher education in colleges, which had been undermined by the withdrawal of grant funding (Esmond, 2012, 2015). Without the support of significant financial investment, growth was insubstantial, as captured by a series of reports (e.g., Joslin & Smith, 2013). Smith et al. (2015) recorded the three‐year progression rate of advanced (i.e., EQF level 4) apprentices as falling from 11.2% in 2006/2007 to 8.8% in 2009/2010. In common with other vocational routes, the transitions of young people from this generation were frequently irregular and disrupted: Whilst the progression of the 2006/2007 cohort into higher education over seven years stood at 19.3%, only 58% of these students progressed within three years, whilst 42% progressed between four and seven years after completing their apprenticeship. Meanwhile, a shift to older apprentices was accomplished at a stroke by re‐designating adults on a work‐based “train to gain” route as apprentices. Smith et al. (2015, p. 9) reported an increase in the total of advanced apprentices who were aged 25+ from 115 or 0.3% of the total in 2006/2007 to 25,015 or 40% of the total in 2010/2011. The policies of conservative‐led governments from 2010 proved more successful, through reforms designed to raise both the profile and quality of apprenticeships, as well as the level of study that most apprenticeships provide. Changes in apprenticeship policy since 2015 have centred on the introduction of new apprenticeship standards (routes with fewer knowledge‐based qualifications and with rigorous end‐tests replacing competency assessments) and a compulsory levy imposed on employers (Richard, 2012; Wolf, 2015). For employers unwilling to spend this levy on training new entrants to the business, degree apprenticeships offered the chance to spend it on management qualifications for their senior staff. These reforms, taken together, have allowed UK governments—positioning apprenticeships as a diversification of higher education—to increase the proportion of apprenticeships at higher levels even as the total number of apprenticeships has declined. The number of approved standards was much higher at EQF level 4 and above, and these were funded at significantly more favourable levels. Thus, 33% of apprenticeships started in 2022/2023 were at higher levels, whilst intermediate level (EQF level 3) apprenticeships had fallen from 65% of the total (prior to the reforms) to only 23% of the total. The total number of apprenticeships at all levels remains lower than before the reforms (Foley, 2021; Powell, 2024). Conversely, the number of higher education entrants studying on degree apprenticeships has more than quadrupled since 2015/2016. This now stands at 13.2%, almost one‐seventh, of the total entrants to degree studies (Department for Education of the UK, 2024). 3.2. More Higher Study, Less Progression This has transformed apprenticeships from a system in which progression to higher education was largely excluded to a system in which apprenticeship now includes study at higher levels. Work‐based and work‐related learning have become recognised components of many degree courses, a change easily Social Inclusion •2025 •Volume 13 •Article 9774 7 represented as a convergence of higher and vocational sectors. Pullen et al. (2024) argue that degree apprenticeships now provide a route through which adults can progress into higher education in a way that was not previously available. Albeit in an impoverished way, this supports the entry to higher education of those who have found themselves in, or close to, more responsible positions at work. In this, they have favourable opportunities to carry out the requirements of their apprenticeship compared to those studying at earlier levels (Esmond, 2020). This reform, however, does not represent an increase in progression from TVET courses at EQF level 3 and below. Instead, it has introduced a new route within higher education. From the perspective of access for disadvantaged students, this shift appears to have widened rather than diminished the divide, as degree apprenticeships and higher‐level apprenticeships become more frequent opportunities for middle‐class staff (Fuller & Unwin, 2017). In 2022/2023, 48% of starting apprenticeships were undertaken by entrants aged 25 and over, who were often senior managers. Evidence of contributions to social mobility remains partial, with even providers reluctant to claim degree apprenticeships as evidence of widening participation (Cavaglia et al., 2022; Lillis & Bravenboer, 2022; Pullen et al., 2024). Reflecting the market policies of recent years, it has been argued that apprenticeship in England may be less likely to promote permeability than to assure the educational success of those already socially advantaged. The appearance of apprenticeships at degree level coincides with the discontinuation of apprenticeships at lower levels of study, from which progression to degree study has become as improbable as ever, but with fewer apprenticeships at lower levels to start with. Rather than a new ladder of opportunity, apprenticeships in England have had many of the lower rungs kicked away. 4. Germany: Between Permeability and the Educational Divide The German TVET system offers a broad spectrum of initial and further vocational qualifications (Frommberger, 2025; Frommberger & Schmees, 2024), aimed at diverse target groups and sectors and providing a range of options for further studies. In numerous cases, these programmes offer the opportunity to obtain TVET qualifications that can be utilised to directly access higher education. In certain instances, hybrid qualifications are also offered, integrating vocational and higher education (in particular, cooperative degree programmes). In general, approximately one‐third of students in Germany transfer to higher education via vocational pathways rather than via general education (Autor:innengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung, 2024, pp. 209–215). The development of these diverse pathways between vocational and higher education has been a historical process. In Germany, there is a long‐standing tradition of acquiring a higher education entrance qualification through TVET (Buchholz & Pratter, 2017; as cited in Autor:innengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung, 2024; see also Frommberger, 2021). The expansion of TVET pathways leading to higher education entrance qualifications constituted a central component of the so‐called educational expansion in the 1970s. In this respect, TVET in Germany serves to develop opportunities for a target group that did not complete general upper secondary education. In this regard, TVET fulfils a compensatory function. However, these opportunities, i.e., to be permitted to transfer to a course of study via TVET, are not traditionally associated with the dual apprenticeship model (EQF level 4). Here, the acquisition of recognised vocational qualifications is predicated on training that takes place predominantly in the company and is Social Inclusion •2025 •Volume 13 •Article 9774 8 supplemented by learning in vocational schools. The transition from dual apprenticeships to employment is a relatively effective process. However, it lacks connections to higher education. This dead end of apprenticeships has shaped the political and scientific discourse on TVET for decades. Particularly since the 1970s, there have been ongoing discussions and demands for the integration of apprenticeships with the higher education entrance qualification. Notwithstanding the implementation of pilot programmes, a direct link between the two has not been established to date. 4.1. Diversified Routes From Apprenticeships to Higher Education With regard to the representation of transitions in Figure 1, the following transitions can be distinguished (see Figure 2): 1. Transitions from apprenticeships to higher education via work experience and an admission test; 2. Transitions through higher TVET qualifications; 3. Transitions through school‐based university entrance qualifications as part of school‐based TVET. Higher TVET EQF level 5/6/7 EQF level 4 Higher educaon TVET Higher TVET qualificaon Higher educaon qualificaon Apprenceship qualificaon Geral educaon qualificaons General educaon 3 2 Higher TVET (Aufsegsfortbildung) FOS/BOS 3 2Work experience + admission test 1 Figure 2. Transition routes to higher education in Germany. Since the beginning of the 2000s, this structural deficit has been partially compensated for by changes to the admission regulations for higher education access in the higher education acts of the federated states. The prevailing regulations stipulate that, in each federated state, individuals who have not obtained a general qualification for university admission at school, but a vocational qualification, may also be admitted to university studies. In order to be considered for this position, it is necessary to have a minimum of three years of professional experience, which must have been gained following the conclusion of the apprenticeship programme. Prospective students are then required to undertake an admission test offered by the target university. If the necessary criteria are met, it is possible to undertake a programme of study that is closely related to the training occupation (Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs, 2009). It should be noted that the regulations pertaining to the admission test are subject to variation depending on the federated state. Some federated states have additional regulations. In the state of Hesse, for instance, the admission test can be omitted if they achieve a certain grade in their apprenticeship qualification. Social Inclusion •2025 •Volume 13 •Article 9774 9 Route 3 was introduced as another qualification on EQF level 4 in order to enter higher education after a horizontal transition. And if students must acquire additional qualifications either within the general education system or through advanced TVET, it raises the question of how effectively the skills gained during apprenticeships are being recognised. As for Germany, this route is the standard pathway for apprenticeship graduates at EQF level 4 who do not already possess a higher education entrance qualification. The educational pathways at FOS (and BOS) are preparing their students for higher education by mostly covering general subjects, even though those schools are part of the system of TVET schools. These routes take another two to three years, depending on whether the objective is access to universities of applied sciences or traditional universities. A similar possibility exists in Norway, which takes just one year to be completed. However, the requirements for students in the supplementary year are extremely high and very much general education‐driven. As long as profitable outcomes like career pathways, salaries, and prestige continue to be achieved primarily through academic qualifications, these transition pathways from vocational to higher education are relevant for social equality. Although the creation of alternative further education pathways in higher TVET is being addressed, it is still not on an equal footing with academic education. Despite the efforts made to support the transition of people with vocational qualifications into higher education, the numbers are comparatively low. This may be due to the fact that creating transition pathways does not sufficiently address the structural, organisational, and individual barriers that are faced by those with vocational qualifications. The presentation of the transition pathways and the analysis were carried out on the basis of a heuristic model (Figure 1). Accordingly, a selection of country‐specific transition mechanisms was made to ensure comparability of the cases. However, this means that other transition mechanisms are not mentioned in this article. These relate, for example, to educational pathways through general education without taking TVET into account, or individual regulations for private or specific types of higher education institutions, such as the recognition of exceptional individual talents in specialised higher education institutions, for example, for sport, music, and art in Germany (Winter, 2019). Furthermore, the cases and transition routes were primarily presented at a formal‐structural level and supported by statistical data. This approach also results in a less detailed depiction of the routes themselves. The limited depth is partly attributable to the need for a uniform basis of comparison, which, on the other hand, provides the possibility for the comparative approach chosen. The partial lack of quantitative presentation of individual transition pathways is due to a lack of data. This applies in particular to the German case. As our cross‐country comparison shows, policy can lay formal bridges only when the supporting institutions and reward structures rise to equal height on both banks. Until vocational and academic credentials share the same societal status, permeability will remain more a design feature on paper than a functioning part of the education landscape. At the same time, it promotes systemic inequality and tends to reinforce it rather than reduce it. Conflict of Interests The authors declare no conflict of interests. Social Inclusion •2025 •Volume 13 •Article 9774 16 References Autor:innengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung. (2024). Bildung in Deutschland 2024: Ein indikatorengestützter Bericht mit einer Analyse zur beruflichen Bildung.https://www.bildungsbericht.de/de/bildungsberichte‐seit‐ 2006/bildungsbericht‐2024/pdf‐dateien‐2024/bildungsbericht‐2024.pdf Avis, J., & Atkins, L. (2017). Youth transitions, VET and the ‘making’ of class: Changing theorisations for changing times? Research in Post‐Compulsory Education,22(2), 165–185. Banscherus, U., Bernhard, N., & Graf, L. (2016). Durchlässigkeit als mehrdimensionale Aufgabe: Bedingungen für flexible Bildungsübergänge. Friedrich‐Ebert‐Stiftung. Barth, E., Moene, O., & Willumsen, F. (2014). The Scandinavian model—An interpretation. Journal of Public Economics,117, 60–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2014.04.001 Behrenbeck, S. (2022). Promotionsrecht an deutschen Hochschulen: Ein Bericht zu den jüngsten Entwicklungen. Hochschulwesen,6, 164–170. Bernhard, N. (2019). Supporting the needs of vocationally qualified students. Changes towards institutional permeability in Germany? Formation Emploi, 146(2), 129–147. Boliver, V. (2015). Are there distinctive clusters of higher and lower status universities in the UK? Oxford Review of Education,41(5), 608–627. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2015.1082905 Brint, S., & Karabel, J. (1989). The diverted dream: Community colleges and the promise of educational opportunity in America,1900–1985. Oxford University Press. Cavaglia, C., McNally, S., & Ventura, G. (2022). The recent evolution of apprenticeships: Apprenticeship pathways and participation since 2015. Sutton Trust. CEDEFOP. (2024). Norway: challenges for the higher vocational education and training recognition scheme. https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/news/norway‐challenges‐higher‐vocational‐education‐and‐ training‐recognition‐scheme Coulson, S., Garforth, L., Payne, G., & Wastell, E. (2017). Admissions, adaptations, and anxieties: Social class inside and outside the elite university. In R. Waller, N. Ingram, & M. Ward (Eds.), Higher education and social inequalities (pp. 2–21). Routledge. Dahm, G., & Peter, F. (2023). Einfach anders oder vielfältig verschieden? Ein differenzierter Blick auf Hochschulabsolvent*innen mit beruflicher Vorqualifikation. In J. Ordemann, F. Peter, & S. Buchholz (Eds.), Vielfalt von hochschulischen Bildungsverläufen (pp. 223–262). Springer. Deißinger, T., Aff, J., Fuller, A., & Jorgensen (2013). Hybrid qualifications: Structures and problems in the context of European VET policy. Peter Lang. Department for Education of the UK. (2024). Higher level learners in England: 2022 to 2023 [Data set].GOV.UK. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/higher‐level‐learners‐in‐england‐2022‐to‐2023?utm_ medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk‐notifications‐topic&utm_source=9d8ec4c7‐020e‐496a‐9710‐ aa7fb773a913&utm_content=immediately Deutscher Qualifikationsrahmen. (2024). Der Deutsche Qualifikationsrahmen für lebenslanges Lernen. Bundesministerium für Forschung, Technologie und Raumfahrt. https://www.dqr.de Direktoratet for høyere utdanning og kompetanse. (n.d.). Y‐veien. https://utdanning.no/tema/hjelp_og_ veiledning/y‐veien Dismore, H. (2014). From apprenticeship to higher education: Navigating the credential landscape. Journal of Vocational Education & Training,66(3), 386–405. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2014.916737 Dörffer, N., & Bernhard, N. (2025). Overcoming obstacles? Institutional support for the pathways to higher education at German vocational schools. Social Inclusion,13, Article 8771. https://doi.org/10.17645/si. 8771 Social Inclusion •2025 •Volume 13 •Article 9774 17 Eckelt, M. (2016). Zur sozialen Praxis der Berufsbildungspolitik: Theoretische Schlüsse aus der Rekonstruktion der Entwicklung des Deutschen Qualifikationsrahmens. W. Bertelsmann Verlag https://doi.org/10.3278/ 6004544w Esmond, B. (2012). ‘I don’t make out how important it is or anything’: Identity and identity formation by part‐time higher education students in an English further education college. Journal of Vocational Education & Training,64(3), 351–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2012.691537 Esmond, B. (2015). Part‐time higher education in English colleges: Adult identities in diminishing spaces. Studies in the Education of Adults,47(1), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/02660830.2015.11661672 Esmond, B. (2020). Emerging apprenticeship practitioner roles in England: Conceptualising the subaltern educator. Vocations and Learning,13(2), 179–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186‐019‐09233‐0 Esmond, B., & Atkins, L. (2022). Education for a polarising world: Between technical elites and welfare vocationalism. Routledge. Foley, N. (2021). Apprenticeship statistics (Briefing paper CBP 06113). House of Commons Library. https:// researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06113/SN06113.pdf Freitag, W., Hartmann, E. A., Loroff, C., Stamm‐Riemer, I., Völk, D., & Buhr, R. (2011). Gestaltungsfeld Anrechnung. Hochschulische und berufliche Bildung im Wandel. Waxmann. Frommberger, D. (2019). Wege zwischen beruflicher und hochschulischer Bildung: Ein internationaler Vergleich. Bertelsmann. Frommberger, D. (2021). Zwischen beruflicher und hochschulischer Bildung. Entwicklungen, Ansätze und Diskurse in Deutschland. In L. Bellmann, K. Büchter, I. Frank, E. M. Krekel, & G. Walden (Eds.), Schlüsselthemen der beruflichen Bildung in Deutschland. Ein historischer Überblick zu wichtigen Debatten und zentralen Forschungsfeldern (pp. 306–322). BIBB. Frommberger, D. (2025). Diversity at a glance: Vocational education and training in Germany between standardisation and fragmentation. In P. Bertuletti, J. K. Schmees, F.‐A. Baumann, D. Frommberger, & F. Magni (Eds.), Vocational education in European regions. Lower Saxony and Lombardy in comparison (pp. 27–44). wbv. https://doi.org/10.3278/9783763976676 Frommberger, D., & Schmees, J. K. (2022). Durchlässigkeit zwischen beruflicher und akademischer Bildung: Kooperative Hochschulangebote im internationalen Vergleich. In A. Wolter, & C. Kerst (Eds.), Studierfähigkeit beruflich Qualifizierter ohne schulische Studienberechtigung: Studienvoraussetzungen, Studienverläufe und Studienerfolg (pp. 67–81). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978‐3‐658‐35429‐9_4 Frommberger, D., & Schmees, J. K. (2024). Deutschland.Internationales Handbuch der Berufsbildung (Vol. 59). BIBB. https://www.bibb.de/dienst/publikationen/de/19386 Fuller, A., & Unwin, L. (2009). Change and continuity in apprenticeship: The resilience of a model of learning. Journal of Education and Work, 22(5), 405–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080903454043 Fuller, A., & Unwin, L. (2017). Apprenticeship quality and social mobility. In A. Fuller, L. Unwin, C. Cavaglia, S. McNally, & G. Ventura (Eds.), Better apprenticeships (pp. 9–36). Sutton Trust. Gale, T. (2022). Higher vocational education as a work of art. In E. Knight, A.‐M. Bathmaker, G. Moodie, K. Orr, S. Webb, & L. Wheelahan (Eds.), Equity and access to high skills through higher vocational education (pp. 215–238). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978‐3‐030‐84502‐5 Gerring, J. (2007). Case study research. Principles and practices. Cambridge University Press. Grubbs, S. J. (2020). Does cooling out still apply? Community colleges and educational expectations. Community College Journal of Research and Practice,44(10/12), 819–834. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10668926.2020.1724573 Hemkes, B. (2018). Transformation und Innovation an der Schnittstelle zwischen beruflicher und hochschulischer Social Inclusion •2025 •Volume 13 •Article 9774 18 Bildung—Durchlässigkeit aus Sicht der beruflichen Bildung (Zwischenbericht). Bundesinstitut für Berufsbildung. https://www.bibb.de/tools/dapro/data/documents/pdf/zw_33308.pdf Hemkes, B., & Wilbers, K. (2019). Einführung: Herausforderung Durchlässigkeit–Versuch einer Näherung. In B. Hemkes, K. Wilbers, & M. Heister (Eds.), Durchlässigkeit zwischen beruflicher und hochschulischer Bildung (pp. 11–33). Barbara Budrich. Higher Education Funding Council for England. (2010). Foundation degrees: Key statistics 2001–02 to 2009–10 [Data set]. https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/id/eprint/981/1/10_12.pdf Hodgson, A., & Spours, K. (2015). The coming of age for FE? Reflections on the past and future role of further education colleges in the UK. Institute of Education Press. Jones, S., Hall, D., & Bragg, J. (2019). If they’ve had a middle class upbringing that’s not their fault: The professional practices and personal identities of admissions staff at selective universities in England. Higher Education,2019(77), 931–947. Joslin, H., & Smith, S. (2013). The progression of apprentices into higher education (Working paper No. 107). Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. Knight, L., Bathmaker, A.‐M., Moodie, G., Orr, K., Webb, S., & Wheelahan, L. (2022). Equity and access to high skills through higher vocational education. Springer. Kroon, S., & Sturm, J. (2007). International comparative case study research in education: key incident analysis and international triangulation. In W. Herrlitz, S. Ongstad, & P.‐H. van de Ven (Eds.), Research on MTE in a comparative international perspective—Theoretical and methodological issues (pp. 99–118). Rodopi. Lillis, F., & Bravenboer, D. (2022). Move on up? Measuring the social mobility impact of apprenticeships. Middlesex University. Meurer, P. (2018). Zugang von FH‐/HAW‐Absolventinnen und—Absolventen zur Promotion, kooperative Promotionen und Promotionsrecht, Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem (No. 16–2018). Expertenkommission Forschung und Innovation. Ministry of Church, Education and Research of Norway. (1999). NOU 1999: 17. Realkompetanse i høgre utdanning. Dokumentasjon av realkompetanse og etablering av kortere og tilpassede studieløp i høgre utdanning. Regjeringen.no. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/nou‐1999‐17/id141762/?ch=3 Ministry of Education and Research of Norway. (2009). St.meld. nr. 44 (2008‐2009).Utdanningslinja. Regjeringen.no. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/stmeld‐nr‐44‐2008‐2009‐/id565231 Ministry of Education and Research of Norway. (2022). NOU 2022: 17. Veier inn—ny modell for opptak til universiteter og høyskoler. Regjeringen.no. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/nou‐2022‐17/ id2948927/?ch=4 Ministry of Education and Research of Norway. (2025). Meld. St. 11 [2024–2025].Fagfolk for en ny tid—med høyere yrkesfaglig utdanning. Regjeringen.no. https://www.regjeringen.no/en/dokumenter/meld.‐st.‐11‐ 20242025/id3091513 National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education. (1997). Higher education in the learning society. HM Stationery Office. https://education‐uk.org/documents/dearing1997/dearing1997.html Nickel, S., & Thiele, A.‐L. (2024). Update 2024: Studieren ohne Abitur in Deutschland. Überblick über aktuelle Entwicklungen (CHE Impulse Nr. 14). Gütersloh. https://www.che.de/download/studieren‐ohne‐abitur‐in‐ deutschland‐update‐2024/?wpdmdl=30116&refresh=68ad6ac30729f1756195523 NOKUT. (n.d.). Ofte stilte spørsmål—fagskoleutdanning (fra studenter). https://www.nokut.no/fagskule‐‐hogare‐ yrkesfagleg‐utdanning/ofte‐stilte‐sporsmal‐‐fagskole Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2020). Norwegian vocational education and training (VET). https://www.udir.no/in‐english/norwegian‐vocational‐education‐and‐training Social Inclusion •2025 •Volume 13 •Article 9774 19 Norwegian Government. (2023). Dobling på få år: 30 000 fagskolestudenter for første gang. https://www. regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/dobling‐pa‐fa‐ar‐30‐000‐fagskolestudenter‐for‐forste‐gang/id3002821 Ordemann, J., Buchholz, S., & Spangenberg, H. (2023). Von direkten und alternativen Wegen ins Studium: Eine quantitative Analyse zum sozialen Phänomen der beruflich‐akademischen Doppelqualifizierung von Studienberechtigten. In J. Ordemann, F. Peter, & S. Buchholz (Eds.), Vielfalt von hochschulischen Bildungsverläufen (pp. 47–78). Springer. Orr, D., & Hovdhaugen, E. (2014). ‘Second chance’ routes into higher education: Sweden, Norway and Germany compared. International Journal of Lifelong Education,33(1), 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370. 2013.873212 Orr, K. (2020). A future for the further education sector in England. Journal of Education and Work,33(7/8), 507–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2020.1852507 Pilz, M. (2019). Modularisierung, Qualifikationsrahmen und Leistungspunktesystem in Schottland. Bertelsmann Stiftung. Powell, A. (2024). Apprenticeship statistics for England. House of Commons Library. Pullen, C., McCaig, C., Emms, K., & Laczik, A. (2024). Widening participation and degree apprenticeships. Edge Foundation. Reay, D., Crozier, G., & Clayton, J. (2009). ‘Strangers in paradise’? Working‐class students in elite universities. Sociology,43(6), 1103–1121. Richard, D. (2012). The Richard review of apprenticeships. School for Startups. https://assets.publishing.service. gov.uk/media/5a79cfb1ed915d042206b345/richard‐review‐full.pdf Schmees, J. K. (2022). Hybridqualifikationen in Europa—jenseits der Frage nach Konkurrenz? In S. Annen, & T. Maier (Eds.), Akademisierung, Hybridqualifikationen und Fachkräftebedarf. Ist die Konkurrenz zwischen akademisch und beruflich Qualifizierten Mythos oder Realität? (pp. 288–302). Bonn. Schmees, J. K., Smeplass, E., Skålholt, A., Hovdhaugen, E., & Imdorf, C. (2024). Pathways to higher education for vocationally qualified students. The case of Norway. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy,11(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2024.2384165 Schröder, T., & Dehnbostel, P. (2019). Equity and access to high skills through higher vocational education. In S. McGrath, M. Mulder, J. Papier, & R. Suart (Eds.), Handbook of vocational education and training (pp. 603–625). Springer. Schwabe‐Ruck, E., & Schlögl, P. (2014). Gleichwertig aber nicht gleichartig? Bildungshistorische Perspektiven auf berufsbezogene Wege an die Hochschule in Deutschland und Österreich. Magazin erwachsenenbildung.at, 2014(21), Article 11. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:8801 Sender, F., & Kriesi, I. (2021). Übergänge in die höhere Berufsbildung in der Schweiz: der Einfluss institutioneller Charakteristiken des schweizerischen Berufsausbildungssystems. Swiss Journal of Sociology, 47(2), 307–334. Smeplass, E., & Schmees, J. K. (2023). Stärken und Herausforderungen des sequenziellen Systems der Berufsausbildung in Norwegen. berufsbildung—Zeitschrift für Theorie‐Praxis‐Dialog,2023(3), 54–57. https:// doi.org./10.3278/BB2303W016 Smith, S., Joslin, H., & Jameson, J. (2015). The progression of apprentices to higher education—2nd cohort update (Working paper No. 240). Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. Spangenberg, H., & Quast, H. (2023). Zum Einfluss vorgelagerter Bildungspfade auf die Studienentscheidung. In J. Ordemann, F. Peter, & S. Buchholz (Eds.), Vielfalt von hochschulischen Bildungsverläufen (pp. 21–46). Springer. Spöttl, G. (2013). Permeability between VET and higher education—A way of human resource development. Social Inclusion •2025 •Volume 13 •Article 9774 20 European Journal of Training and Development,5(37), 454–471. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090591311 327286 Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs. (2009). Hochschulzugang für beruflich qualifizierte Bewerber ohne schulische Hochschulzugangsberechtigung (Beschluss der Kultusministerkonferenz vom 06.03.2009). https://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/veroeffentlichungen_beschluesse/2009/2009_03_ 06‐Hochschulzugang‐erful‐qualifizierte‐Bewerber.pdf Stifterverband für die Deutsche Wissenschaft. (2022). Hochschul‐Bildungs‐Report 2020, Abschlussbericht. Hochschulbildung in der Transformation. https://www.hochschulbildungsreport.de/sites/hsbr/files/ hochschul‐bildungs‐report_abschlussbericht_2022.pdf Virolainen, M., & Tønder, A. H. (2018). Progression to higher education from VET in Nordic countries: Mixed policies and pathways. In C. H. Jørgensen, O. J. Olsen, & D. P. Thunqvist (Eds.), Vocational education in the Nordic countries: Learning from diversity (pp. 51–73). Routledge. Wilbers, K. (2014). Das Niveau 5 des Deutschen Qualifikationsrahmens (DQR) als Plattformfür die Gestaltung bildungsbereichsübergreifender Arrangements (Berichte zur Wirtschaftspädagogik und Personalentwicklung, 2014–3). Universität Erlangen‐Nürnberg, Lehrstuhl für Wirtschaftspädagogik und Personalentwicklung. Winter, D. (2019). Institutionelle Auswahl am Übergang in die Hochschule. Ermöglichung und Schließung von Bildungsverläufen junger Erwachsener. In H.‐H. Krüger, K. Hüfner, C. Keßler, S. Kreuz, P. Leinhos, & D. Winter (Eds.), Exklusive Bildungskarrieren von Jugendlichen und ihre Peers am Übergang in die Hochschule und Beruf. Ergebnisse einer qualitativen Längsschnittstudie (pp. 115–140). Springer. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978‐3‐658‐23175‐0_4 Wolf, A. (2015). Fixing a broken training system: The case for an apprenticeship levy. Social Market Foundation. Wolter, A. (2018). Berufliche Bildung und Studierfähigkeit. Bildungspolitische Kontroversen und empirische Forschungsergebnisse. Berufsbildung. Zeitschrift für Theorie‐Praxis‐Dialog,72(169), pp. 18−21. About the Authors Johannes Karl Schmees is an associate professor for TVET at the Institute of Education & Skills, University of Derby, UK. His research interests are in international and comparative research on TVET systems. Thereby, he is particularly interested in international and bilateral influences on the development of TVET structures. Tim Migura is a research associate at Osnabrück University in the Department of Vocational Education Studies. His research focuses on the academisation and Europeanisation of health professions in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland, as well as in‐company training and teaching activities. Bill Esmond is a professor of professional education and training in the Institute of Education & Skills, University of Derby, UK. His research seeks to extend international understandings of vocational/workplace practices and their possibilities for social justice. Social Inclusion •2025 •Volume 13 •Article 9774 21 Dietmar Frommberger has been a professor of vocational education at Osnabrück University since 2017. He previously held a professorship at the University of Magdeburg. His research interests include comparative aspects of TVET research, especially with an international focus, as well as structures and functions of TVET in Germany. Eli Smeplass is an associate professor of vocational pedagogy at the Department of Teacher Education at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Her research explores education, inequality, and professional learning, with a particular focus on vocational pathways. She works at the intersection of sociological theory and pedagogical practice. Social Inclusion •2025 •Volume 13 •Article 9774 22