Quantitative and qualitative research would provide a better understanding of the profile and motivations of VET participants.

The difference between the number of VET enrolments and applicants could be analysed for policy making.

The main target group for subsidised VET education would be clarified (based on age, education, income, place of residence and level of poverty, for example).

A level playing field could be created for all types of VET providers (e.g. public, private, NGOs).

There would be a spirit of 'one big VET family' and co-management of the system.

Public and private schools could cooperate at local level.

This could increase the limited VET offering and reduce geographical barriers.

All VET providers would receive funding based on clear rules, which would reduce financial barriers.

Students with vouchers could choose freely between public or private VET providers.

The unified VET admission exam would be applied to all VET providers, including private VET providers

Entry requirements to publicly subsidised VET would be amended (i.e. based on age, education, income and place of residence).

Students from poor socio-economic households would get priority access to VET.

Measures would be taken to reduce both academic and financial barriers.

New VET first cycle programmes would be offered in higher education in order to increase the VET offering and its attractiveness.

Counselling and guidance services would be provided on an ongoing (lifelong) basis for every student in the education system.

All learners would have access to information and guidance for educational and occupational choices at crucial moments in their lives.

The information barrier would be reduced for the functioning of the complex VET system.

Given the complaints from employers, technical skills would be complemented by key competences.

There would be a special focus on foundation and transversal skills, particularly in regions and rural areas.

Clear incentives would be provided for the private sector to be involved in VET in different ways.

Small and micro companies would be supported in providing collective training offerings in clusters.

A new approach of co-management and power sharing would be implemented in VET governance.

Measures would be taken to counteract the limits of a weak and fragmented private sector.

Different alternatives of first work experience would be explored systematically (e.g. internships, traineeships, volunteerism, job shadowing, summer jobs, social entrepreneurship).

The job status of teachers would be improved first before implementing the new law.

Improved salaries and working conditions would become a reality, so that more talented young people enter the teaching profession.

Merit-based hiring and firing criteria would be developed and implemented for VET teachers.

Ambitious nature of reforms

High number of priorities set for implementation

Complex design of the VET system that requires a high level of professionalism

The need for continuous support to service providers and end users for efficient functioning

Continuing focus at the policy-making level

Implementation modalities are not always clear yet

Not enough attention paid to the needs of service providers and end users on the ground

No special focus on the implementation in the regions and rural areas

Not enough attention to budget and staffing implications of reforms

Limited capacity of implementation in the regions and rural areas

Continuous reliance on donors' interventions

Risk of less efficient implementation in the regions