| > Duales Studium is hardly a novelty. As I said it's actually from the 60s. The modern concept "Duales Studium" is both a novelty and a fringe. If you want to keep arguing semantics, I don't care. > In reality the Ausblidung enables further education offerings. Did I claim otherwise? To put in other words: Unless you have an "Ausbildung" or an "(Fach)Abitur" you are barred from further education. > Ensures that people actually know something about their jobs, beyond training on the job. It enforces that people know things they don't need to know. It prevents people willing to work but unwilling to spend three years as an underpaid apprentice from taking part in the market. A 25% drop-out rate for "Berufsausbildung" speaks for itself. Out of cursiosity: Did you ever actually do a "Berufsausbildung"? University graduates are entering the market as full employees with zero actual work experience. What gives? > A rather useless recommendation. No, it's crucial. If you correlate low youth unemployment with the education system, you had better corrected for factors like government programs to "hide" it. > That's wrong. The dual education model addresses people who want a more practical education. Making a choice does not mean 'weeding out'. The education model allows people later to move on to more advanced education tracks and many do. The facts are that (in many states) it is decided which child gets to do an "Abitur" (requirement for university attendance) when the children are as young as 10. From that point on, it becomes more and more difficult (albeit not impossible). This isn't particular to "Duale Ausbildung", in fact nowadays if you want an "Ausbildung" in one of the better jobs, you had better done an "Abitur" as well. |