SABER WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENTwbgfiles.worldbank.org/documents/hdn/ed/saber/supporting... · 2015-05-05 · Turkey WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT SABER Country Report 2012 Dimensions Status 1

Turkey

WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENTSABER Country Report

2012

Dimensions Status

1. Strategic FrameworkThe Government of Turkey has demonstrated strong leadership and a vision for workforce development (WfD) that has benefited from an effective advocacy of the business community. The country has taken some modest steps towards fostering a demand-led approach, such as institutionalizing employer engagement at the local level and conducting assessments of national economic prospects and skills implications for a few key sectors. Legislation and agreements exist to promote coordination amongst WfD stakeholders, but strategic coordination efforts face implementation challenges.

2. System OversightThe rating reflects the challenges in ensuring efficiency and equity of funding for WfD. Turkey has established institutions for setting occupational standards, defined a qualifications framework, and specified regulations for testing and certification, but the number of occupational standards established and the testing and certification mechanisms lag behind.

3. Service DeliveryFew measures are in place for quality assurance of training provision. All training providers are required to report administrative data which are occasionally used to assess institutional performance, but there are no explicit targets, and financial or non-financial incentives for performance are limited. Though some steps were taken to strengthen the links between training institutions and industry (i.e. UMEM project), such links are mostly limited to industry internships and training for trainees. Public access to data on labor market outcomes is still limited and gathered through a few ad hoc skills-related surveys or evaluations of specific targeted programs.

TURKEY WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2012

SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 2

Table of contents

Executive Summary............................................................................................................................... ........................ 3

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... ............................... 4

2. Country Context ............................................................................................................................... ......................... 6

3. Key Findings and Policy Implications ...................................................................................................................... 11

4. Aligning Workforce Development to Key Economic and Social Priorities .............................................................. 14

Socioeconomic Aspirations, Priorities and Reforms ........................................................................................... 14

SABER WfD Ratings on the Strategic Framework ............................................................................................... 16

Implications of the Findings ............................................................................................................................... . 20

5. Governing the System for Workforce Development .............................................................................................. 21

Overall Institutional Landscape........................................................................................................................... 21

SABER WfD Ratings on System Oversight........................................................................................................... 23


6. Managing Service Delivery............................................................................................................................... ....... 28

Overview of the Delivery of Training Services .................................................................................................... 28

SABER WfD Ratings on Service Delivery ............................................................................................................. 29


Annex 1: Acronyms ............................................................................................................................... ...................... 34

Annex 2: The SABER WfD Analytical Framework........................................................................................................ 35

Annex 3: Rubrics for Scoring the SABER WfD Data..................................................................................................... 36

Annex 4: References and Informants.......................................................................................................................... 45

Annex 5: SABER WfD Scores ............................................................................................................................... ........ 48

Annex 6: Authorship and Acknowledgements............................................................................................................ 49



Executive SummaryStarting from early 2000s, the Turkish economy has been growing steadily except during the global financial crisis of 200709, accompanied by an increase in productivity. Turkey’s overall population is young, and its working age population hasincreased by over 10 percent during the last decade. This demographic transition in the labor force offers bothopportunities and challenges. The findings of the SABERWfD exercise and this report suggest that improving relevant skillsand employability is becoming one of the most important strategic objectives of the government and the private sector,which consider a skilled and active workforce to be a vital tool for growth. A number of steps are now being taken by allactors, and, when fully implemented, they have the potential to significantly improve workforce development (WfD) inTurkey.

The study benchmarked levels of support for WfD in Turkey and identified measures that have helped to progress WfDwithin the framework of human capital development. The study takes advantage of a new diagnostic tool (SABER WfD) toassess Turkey’s WfD for 2012. The tool is a part of the World Bank’s initiative on Systems Assessment for Better EducationResults (SABER), focusing on several policy domains including WfD. Three broad functional dimensions of WfD policieswere assessed based on a wide range of primary and secondary evidence: strategic framework; system oversight; andservice delivery.

Key WfD reforms have been championed by the Turkish government as the driving force of economic development,human development, and social inclusion. Between 2010 and 2012, the government has increased its efforts to strengthenthe link between employment and vocational education and training (VET) with the help of an action plan. Several targetedtraining programs for the unemployed from different groups of society have been introduced after the economic crises in2008 2009, and a wide range of ambitious projects have been initiated to improve the skills of the current and potentiallabor force (workers/unemployed, and students).

The government has increased the allocations for related ministries and agencies to enable them to achieve the desiredobjectives. In order to encourage financial contributions from employers and the private sector, the government has alsobeen working on legislative arrangements to facilitate partnerships between training providers and employers.

Regarding diversifying pathways, the government has developed a wide range of training programs using a modularsystem for vocational and technical education (mostly at the secondary level) so that students can follow flexible pathwaysfor skills acquisition. Moreover, the government started working on improving the quality and relevance of trainingprograms, and taking steps to improve the public perception of VET through joint public awareness initiatives/campaignswith the private sector and NGOs. Despite initiatives to enhance the public image of VET, as of 2012 it was unclear whetherthe certificates obtained from the vocational and technical high schools and vocational colleges will be directly recognizedby the National Qualifications Framework.

Although awide range of public and private actors are active in training provision, at the time of the analysis, fewmeasuresare in place for quality assurance. Furthermore, the existence of explicit performance targets for public institutions andavailability of incentives in place for performance are debatable.

The government makes efforts to improve the country’s WfD system. However, it is not easy for WfD stakeholders toevaluate the effects of different programs and develop new initiatives. The government has been able to define most ofthe problems correctly and in a timely fashion (i.e. the lack of efficient coordination between WfD stakeholders, and theimportance of non state WfD stakeholders’ participation in decision making). These deficiencies have been addressed inpolicy documents, but solid steps still need to be taken to ensure that they are fully implemented.

Turkey has adequate capacity for data collection, and has been able to develop strong MIS/IT systems. However, the poorcollaboration among WfD stakeholders may result in duplication of effort in data collection and evaluation, insufficientmonitoring and evaluation, and incomplete decision making.

As a result of the latest reform initiatives, the quality, coverage, and efficiency of the Turkish WfD system may improvesignificantly. But these efforts must be carefully implemented (with immediate fine tuning interventions when necessary)and documented in detail.



1. Introduction1

Although Turkey experienced prosperous growth duringthe early and mid 2000s, similar success could not beachieved in increasing the employment rate. The Turkisheconomy, which had already started to slow down in2007, was severely affected by the global economic crisisin 2008, and the global financial turmoil led to a sharpcontraction starting in the last quarter of 2008. Therecovery began in the last quarter of 2009 and was rapid,with growth reaching 9 percent in 2010 and 8.5 percentin 2011.

Despite a remarkable upturn after the crisis, the Turkishlabor market continued to be characterized bypersistently low employment rates—particularly amongwomen and the youth—and low labor productivity. Since2009, employment growth has averaged 5.5 percent perannum, a very high rate by any standard. Nonetheless,less than half of the working age population (15 64 yearolds) was employed as of mid 2012 (World Bank 2013b),and 35% of the young population is neither employednor in education (OECD, 2013).

The reaction of the Government of Turkey to theundesirable labor market figures was to rely on ActiveLabor Market Programs (ALMPs) to (i) equip the laborforce with the qualities required by the labor market in ashort period of time; (ii) give the unemployedprofessional experience and work discipline; (iii) supportthose who wish to establish their own business; and (iv)fill the existing and potential vacancies in the labormarket as quickly as possible. A structuraltransformation was initiated in 2008 with the provisionof required resources from the UnemploymentInsurance Fund to the Turkish Employment Agency(ISKUR) as part of a series of arrangements known asEmployment Packages.

Successful development of the workforce requires atechnical and vocational education and training (TVET)system that is alignedwith the needs of the labormarket.The “Strengthening Vocational and Technical Educationand Training Project” (SVET), launched in 2005, aimed toaddress the mismatch between education and trainingprograms and the needs of the labor market. Among

1 The analysis was conducted in 2011 2012 period, and the findings of thisreport reflects the WfD situation in Turkey as of 2012.2 For details on SABER see http://www.worldbank.org/education/saber; foracronyms used in this report, see Annex 1.

other achievements, the SVET program resulted in theestablishment of the Vocational Qualifications Authorityand the development of modular education programswith an emphasis on proficiency and specialization. Also,in 2010 the government initiated a combined approachto enable such alignment through the Action Plan forStrengthening the Linkages between Employment andTechnical Vocational Education and Training (TVET).

Analytical FrameworkTo inform policy dialogue on these important issues, thisreport presents a comprehensive diagnostic of thecountry’s WfD policies and institutions. The results arebased on a new World Bank tool designed for thispurpose. Known as SABER WfD, the tool is part of theWorld Bank’s initiative on Systems Approach for BetterEducation Results (SABER)2 whose aim is to providesystematic documentation and assessment of the policyand institutional factors that influence the performanceof education and training systems. The SABER WfD toolencompasses initial, continuing and targeted vocationaleducation and training that are offered through multiplechannels, and focuses largely on programs at thesecondary and post secondary levels.

The tool is based on an analytical framework3 thatidentifies three functional dimensions of WfD policiesand institutions:

(1) Strategic framework, which refers to the praxis ofhigh level advocacy, partnership, and coordination,typically across traditional sectoral boundaries, inrelation to the objective of aligning WfD in criticalareas to priorities for national development;

(2) System Oversight, which refers to the arrangementsgoverning funding, quality assurance4 and learningpathways that shape the incentives and informationsignals affecting the choices of individuals,employers, training providers and otherstakeholders; and

(3) Service Delivery, which refers to the diversity,organization and management of training provision,both state and non state, that deliver results on the

3 For an explanation of the SABER WfD framework see Tan et al 2013.4 In the report, external quality assurance is discussed as a part of the systemoversight. The internal quality assurance, which is exercised by providers, isexplained under the service delivery dimension.



ground by enabling individuals to acquire marketand job relevant skills.

Taken together, these three dimensions allow forsystematic analysis of the functioning of aWfD system asa whole. The focus in the SABER WfD framework is onthe institutional structures and practices of publicpolicymaking and what they reveal about capacity in thesystem to conceptualize, design, coordinate andimplement policies in order to achieve results on theground.

Each dimension is composed of three Policy Goals thatcorrespond to important functional aspects of WfDsystems (see Figure 1). Policy Goals are further brokendown into discrete Policy Actions and Topics that revealmore details about the system.5

Figure 1: Functional Dimensions and Policy Goals in theSABER WfD Framework

Source: Tan et al. 2013

5 See Annex 2 for an overview of the structure of the framework.6 See Annex 3 for the rubrics used to score the data. As in other countries, thedata are gathered by a national principal investigator and his or her team,based on the sources indicated in Annex 4; and they are scored by the WorldBank’s SABER WfD team. See Annex 5 for the detailed scores and Annex 6 fora list of those involved in data gathering, scoring and validation and in reportwriting.

Implementing the AnalysisInformation for the analysis is gathered using astructured SABER WfD Data Collection Instrument (DCI).The instrument is designed to collect, to the extentpossible, facts rather than opinions about WfD policiesand institutions. For each Topic, the DCI poses a set ofmultiple choice questions which are answered based ondocumentary evidence and interviews withknowledgeable informants. The answers allow eachTopic to be scored on a four point scale againststandardized rubrics based on available knowledge onglobal good practice (See Figure 2).6 Topic scores areaveraged to produce Policy Goal scores, which are thenaggregated into Dimension scores.7 The results arefinalized following validation by the relevant nationalcounterparts, including the informants themselves.

Figure 2: SABER WfD Scoring Rubrics

Source: Tan et al. 2013.

The rest of this report summarizes the key findings of theSABER WfD assessment and also presents the detailedresults for each of the three functional dimensions. Toput the results into context, the report begins belowwitha brief profile of the country’s socioeconomic makeup.

7 Since the composite scores are averages of the underlying scores, they arerarely whole numbers. For a given composite score, X, the conversion to thecategorical rating shown on the cover is based on the following rule: 1.00 X1.75 converts to “Latent”; 1.75 < X 2.50, to “Emerging;” 2.50 < X 3.25,

to “Established;” and 3.25 < X 4.00, to “Advanced.”



2. Country ContextTurkey is an upper middle income Muslim country witha pluralist secular democracy. It has long been a memberof international organizations (i.e. OECD, and NATO), a G20 member country from its establishment, and acandidate state for EU membership from 1999.

Turkey has a population of 73.6 million people (in 2012)and a per capita GDP of $10,524 (in 2011), which issignificantly lower than the OECD average of $36,994,but is much higher than its 2002 level.

Turkish economy

Turkey experienced erratic and fragile growth in the1990s, with high inflation rates and public deficits, butfollowing the crisis in 2001, a successful period ofmacroeconomic stability and high growth commenced.During this period, inflation fell significantly along withreal interest rates, as a result of improvements in publicfinance and important structural reforms, namely theenactment of the Public Financial Management andControl Law, Public Procurement Law and Banking Law;establishment of regulatory and supervisory boards inthe energy, telecommunication, and agriculture sectors;introduction of strategic planning in public institutions;and initiation of social security and universal healthinsurance reforms.

From 2002 to 2007, the Turkish economy grew at anaverage rate of 6.8% per annum. Industry and servicessectors defined the overall growth trend, while theagricultural sector displayed a different growth path (dueto agricultural shedding, negative climatic conditions,production variations, etc.) (see Figure 3). Starting in

2007, growth beganweakening and the Turkish economywas badly affected by the global financial crisis in 2008,with a negative impact on exports and a massive capitaloutflow. Turkey was among the 10 percent hardest hitcountries in 2009, but it was also one of the quickest tobounce back. The recovery was rapid, with growthreaching 9 percent in 2010 and 8.5 percent in 2011 (seeFigure 4).

The EU is Turkey’s main trade partner. Turkey’s totalforeign trade volume was 48.5% of GDP in 2011 and hitan all time high for exports at $135 billion. However,Turkey still imports far more than it exports, with energy(oil and natural gas) continuing to be the chief import forTurkey, comprising a quarter of all imports. Machinery isboth a large import and export item. Manufacturedgoods like iron, steel and plastic, as well as woven orknitted articles, make up over a quarter of all exports(see Figure 5).

10.0%

5.0%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012GDP at purchasers prices AgricultureIndustry Services, etc

Source: Own Calcullations

64202468

1012

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011%Ch

ange

OECD Average Turkey

Source: World Bank, 2013a

Source: Turkstat, 2013a

Figure 3: Sectoral Growth Rates

Figure 4: Turkey and OECD Annual Growth Rates

Figure 5: Foreign Trade in 2012 by Economic Classification



Demography and Labor Force

Turkey’s population has been growing at an annual rateof 1.1% (as of 2011), which is much higher than the

OECD average of 0.63% (OECD Factbook). The countrynow has the third largest population in Europe.

Turkey has the highest ratio of young to total populationin Europe, with 51% being below 30 years old, and 34%below 20. The 15–24 year old group constitutes 11.5% ofthe population and 17% of the total labor force supply inTurkey. In 2011, the share of the population aged 65+was 4% in Turkey, whereas the OECD average was 14.8%(Turkstat, 2012).

Despite its young population, overall labor forceparticipation in Turkey is low, and has always beenbehind the level of developed countries. In 2010, thelabor force participation of the 15–64 year old group was51.9% in Turkey and 71.0% in the EU (Eurostat, 2010).

Turkey does not perform as well as the EU in terms of theemployment rate (46.3% against 64.2%). This is mainlydue to low female labor force participation andemployment levels. In 2010, women’s labor forceparticipation and employment rates were 30.2% and26.2% in Turkey, while in the EU they were 64.5% and58.2%, respectively.

Turkey experienced remarkable growth between 2002and 2007 – averaging 6.8% per year – but it did not resultin increased employment, which overall grew at only1.2% per year. Increasing total factor productivity in thesame period, as a result of structural reforms, alsolimited the increase in employment.

Table 1: Population (Main Indicators)Indicator (1000 people) 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Population 66,379 67,227 68,066 68,901 69,724 70,542 71,343 72,376 73,60415+ Population 47,544 48,359 49,174 49,994 50,772 51,686 52,541 53,593 54,724Youth Population (ages 15 24) 11,840 11,757 11,670 11,583 11,490 11,513 11,548 11,534 11,574Labor force 22,016 22,455 22,751 23,114 23,805 24,748 25,641 26,725 27,339Men 16,348 16,704 16,836 17,098 17,476 17,898 18,257 18,867 19,147Women 5,669 5,750 5,916 6,016 6,329 6,851 7,383 7,859 8,192Youth 4,474 4,436 4,365 4,364 4,381 4,454 4,426 4,529 4,422

Labor Force Participation Rate (%) 46.3 46.4 46.3 46.2 46.9 47.9 48.8 49.9 50.0Men 70.3 70.6 69.9 69.8 70.1 70.5 70.8 71.7 71.0Women 23.3 23.3 23.6 23.6 24.5 26.0 27.6 28.8 29.5Youth 37.8 37.7 37.4 37.7 38.1 38.7 38 39.3 38.2

Source: Turkstat, 2013

Table 2: Population (International Comparison, 2010)

Indicator Middle IncomeCountries

High IncomeCountries Turkey

Population growth rate (annual %) 0.69 0.58 1.25Youth Dependency Ratio (% of working age population) 30.82 25.80 38.960 14 age population (% share) 21.67 17.31 26.3615 64 age population (% share) 70.3 67.1 67.6565+ age population (% share) 8.0 15.57 5.97



The services sector dominates sectoral employment inTurkey. The employment level of this sector startedrising from 2000, as Turkey’s economy began to shiftaway from agricultural production, with employment inagriculture declining in favor of services (see figure 6).Since 2001, the increase in employment in the servicessector has nearly matched the decrease in agriculturalemployment, while industry and construction haveremained constant. The share of employment in servicesincreased from 38% in 1990 to 56% in 2011.

Unemployment has remained around 10% in the lastdecade, with the exception of 2009, when the economiccrisis hit employment hard. In 2008, the most importanteffects of the global crisis were observed in the Turkishlabor market. Rapidly shrinking global demand(specifically in the EU, Turkey’s main trade partner)stunted manufacturing, especially in the industrialsector, and the decrease in manufacturing, as wellas sustained uncertainties about the global economy,

brought rapid erosion in employment. Job losses and theincrease in labor force participation triggered a hike inthe unemployment rate, which peaked in February 2009.Youth unemployment has been much higher than theoverall unemployment rate (9.6% above overallunemployment from 2004 to 2011). As a result of thecrisis, youth unemployment reached 25.3% in 2009before falling back to 18.4% in 2011.

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Agriculture IndustryConstruction Services

Source: Turkstat, 2013b

Table 3: Employment (Main Indicators)Indicator 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Employment (1000 People) 19,632 20,067 20,423 20,738 21,194 21,277 22,594 24,110 24,821Men 14,585 14,959 15,165 15,382 15,598 15,406 16,170 17,137 17,512Women 5,047 5,108 5,258 5,356 5,595 5,871 6,425 6,973 7,309Youth 3,554 3,554 3,533 3,493 3,484 3,328 3,465 3,697 3,647

Employment Rate (%) 41.3 41.5 41.5 41.5 41.7 41.2 43 45 45Men 62.7 63.2 62.9 62.7 62.6 60.7 62.7 65.1 65.0Women 20.8 20.7 21.0 21.0 21.6 22.3 24 25.6 26.3Youth 30.0 30.2 30.3 30.2 30.3 28.9 30 32.1 31.5


Figure 6: Labor Force by Sector (% of Employed Age 15+)

Table 4: Unemployment (Main Indicators)

Indicator 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Unemployed (1000 People) 2,385 2,388 2,328 2,376 2,611 3,471 3,046 2,615 2,518Men 1,762 1,746 1,671 1,716 1,877 2,491 2,088 1,730 1,635Women 622 642 658 660 734 979 959 885 883Youth 919 881 832 871 897 1.126 961 832 775

Unemployment Rate (%) 10.8 10.6 10.2 10.3 11.0 14.0 11.9 9.8 9.2Men 10.8 10.5 9.9 10.0 10.7 13.9 11.4 9.2 8.5Women 11.0 11.2 11.1 11.0 11.6 14.3 13 11.3 10.8Youth 20.6 19.9 19.1 20.0 20.5 25.3 21.7 18.4 17.5




Although youth are becoming more educated andskilled, over half (52%) of the working age population(WAP) still has less than basic education (see Figure 7),accounting for 64% of the jobless and 65% of theinformally employed. Better educated adults are morelikely to participate in the labor force (80% of collegegraduates, less than 50% of those without a high schooldiploma, and only 20% of illiterate adults) (World Bank,2013b).

Around 650,000 new people make it into the nonagricultural labor force in Turkey per year. For Turkishfirms to stay competitive in a global market, the ‘skillsbar’ of new graduates (as well as the existing labor force)has to increase. However, recent studies suggest thatthere are indications of a mismatch between the skillsprofile of youth and the skills demanded by employers(McKinsey, 2012). In fact, 56% of employers in Turkey saythey cannot find workers with the right skills (EBRDWorld Bank BEEPS, 2008).

Turkey has taken measures to improve the quality andaccessibility of education for many years. In 1997,targeted steps were taken with the implementation oflegislation that increased compulsory schooling to 8years. This has helped Turkey reach universal schoolingat the primary level, with 98% of school aged children

being enrolled in primary schools in 2012. With therecent legal amendment in 2012, secondary educationalso became compulsory. Thus, compulsory education isnow composed of three 4 year segments of primary,lower secondary, and upper secondary.

52

19 19

10

43

22 23

12

57

17 179

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Less than basic Basic Secondary College

Total Men Women

Table 5: Labor Force and Employment (International Comparison)

Indicator Year Middle IncomeCountries

High IncomeCountries Turkey

Labor force participation (%) 2009 68.55 60.72 46.8Labor force participation, women (%) 2009 59.25 52.16 24Labor force participation, men (%) 2009 77.8 69.63 69.6

Unemployment rate (% share of total employment) 2009 8.0* 8.04 14.0Employment rate (% 15+ population) 2010 64.68 55.79 43.3

Employment rate women (% 15+ female population) 2010 55.98 48.1 24Employment rate men (% 15+ male population) 2010 73.39 63.8 62.7

Agriculture (% share of total employment) 2010 31.42 3.38 25Agriculture women (% share of female employment) 2010 9.3** 2.4 42.5

Industry (% share of total employment ) 2010 26.3 24.01 20Industry women (% share of female employment ) 2010 18.9** 12.3 15

Services (% share of total employment ) 2010 42.19 72.18 55Services women (% share of female employment ) 2010 71.7** 85.0 42.5

Non agricultural female employment (% share of non agr. emp.) 2010 44.6* 46.46 21.8Source: Turkstat annual statistics, World Bank World Development Indicators, 2007,2010* data from 2006, ** data from 2007

Figure 7: Education level of the working age population

Source: World Bank, 2013b



Reform initiatives focused also on education outcomes—including curriculum reform, phased modernization ofteaching and learning materials and practices, a strongerfocus on measuring learning outcomes through largescale national and international assessments, andenhanced monitoring and evaluation systems. Theresults of these initiatives are reflected in international

test scores (i.e. Program for International StudentAssessment PISA, and Trends in InternationalMathematics and Science Study TIMMS), which show anarrowing of the gap between the performance ofTurkish students and the average performance ofstudents from OECD countries (see Figure 8).Notwithstanding this improvement, some challengesremain, and the performance of Turkey’s average 15year old is still one full year behind the OECD average(World Bank, 2013c).

The Lifelong Learning Strategy was developed in 2006 toprovide individuals with education outside the schoolsystem. In 2008 it also started to make extensive use ofActive Labor Market Programs (ALMPs) to (i) equip thelabor force with the skills required by the labor market ina short period of time, (ii) provide the unemployed withprofessional experience and work discipline, (iii) givesupport to those who wish to establish their ownbusiness, and (iv) fill the existing and potential vacanciesin the labor market as quickly as possible.

The next section contains a substantive summary of theSABER WfD findings and their policy implications bytaking the summary of the country context intoconsideration.

380

400

420

440

460

480

500

520

Reading

Math

Science

Reading

Math

Science

Reading

Math

Science

2006 2009 2012

Meanscore

OECD Turkey

Figure 8: Average OECD and Turkey student

Source: OECD



3. Key Findings and Policy ImplicationsThis chapter highlights findings from the assessment ofTurkey’sWfD system as of 2012 based on the SABER WfDanalytical framework and tool. The focus is on policies,institutions and practices in three important functionaldimensions of policymaking and implementation—strategic framework, system oversight and servicedelivery. Because these aspects collectively create theoperational environment in which individuals, firms andtraining providers, both state and non state, makedecisions with regard to training, they exert an importantinfluence on observed outcomes in skills development.Strong systems of WfD have institutionalized processesand practices for reaching agreement on priorities, forcollaboration and coordination, and for generatingroutine feedback that sustain continuous innovation andimprovement. By contrast, weak systems arecharacterized by fragmentation, duplication of effort andlimited learning from experience.

The SABER WfD assessment results summarized belowprovide a baseline for understanding the current statusof the WfD system in the country, as well as a basis fordiscussing ideas on how best to strengthen it in thecoming years.

Overview of the SABER WfD AssessmentResultsFigure 9 shows the overall results for the threeFunctional Dimensions in the SABER WfD framework.8

For the Strategic Framework dimension Turkey is ratedat the Established level of development, while the scorefor System Oversight and Service Delivery is at theEmerging level. The findings suggest that Turkey’spolicies and institutions for WfD do not differ a lot interms of performance and efficiency along the path frompolicy conceptualization to implementation.

Turkey’s score at the established level for StrategicFramework reflects strength in terms of setting thestrategic direction, but some gaps in regard to fosteringa demand led approach and strengthening coordination.The most positive finding was the awareness on theeconomic prospects that can be developed throughimproving skills. Government’s leadership and vision forWfD is visible and there is effective advocacy of thebusiness community on this matter. Turkey has taken

8 See Annex 6 for the full results.

some positive, yet modest steps by institutionalizingemployer engagement at the local level. However, thelack of adequate monitor ng of incentives for employersto upgrade skills poses a challenge in terms of measuringthe real life implications of the assessments. Legislationand agreements amongst stakeholders exist to promotecoordination, and numerous committees and workshopshave been convened; however, strategic coordinationefforts face implementation issues and rarely lead tomeaningful progress.

Figure 9: Turkey’s Dimension Level Scores

Source: based on analysis of the data collected using the SABERWfD questionnaire. Note: See Figure 2 for an explanation of thescale on the horizontal axis.

In terms of System Oversight, Turkey receives an overallemerging rating. The rating is just below the establishedlevel, and can be upgraded if some developments areobserved. The rating, mainly, reflects the challenges instrengthening the efficiency and equity of fundingmechanisms of the different governmental agenciesundertaking WfD activities. Turkey has establishedinstitutions for setting occupational standards, andspecified regulations for qualifications framework,testing and certification, but the number of occupationalstandards established and the steps taken towards afunctioning testing and certification mechanism lag



behind as of 2012. Although there are establishedpathways for TVET at the secondary and post secondarylevel, the certifications gained at this level do not yetdirectly relate to the National Qualifications Framework.There exists a clear policy attention is given torecognition of prior learning, however, the articulation ofskills certification is at infancy level.

While Turkey is at the emerging level with regards to theService Delivery dimension, the rating for this dimensionis comparably lower than the other two dimensions.More specifically, although a wide range of public andprivate actors are active in training provision, publicinstitutions provide the bulk of the training.Furthermore, few measures are in place for qualityassurance, and there are no explicit performance targets,financial or non financial incentives for performance.Though some steps were taken (i.e. UMEM Project) tostrengthen the linkages between training institutionsand industry, such linkages are mostly limited to industryinternships and training for trainees; industry expertsrarely have a role in influencing the curricula of trainingprograms and have no role in providing input for thestandards of facilities. Lastly, all training providers, stateand non state, are required to collect and report basicadministrative data, which are occasionally used toassess institutional performance as well as to analyzesystem level trends and issues. However, sources of dataon labor market outcomes are still limited to a few adhoc skills related surveys or evaluations of specifictargeted programs, and public access to data is limited.

Policy Implications of the FindingsOver the past decade Turkish governments have madeconcerted efforts to establish strong linkages betweeneducation & training and employment, but the Turkishlabor market still suffers from amismatch between labordemand and skills supply.

Appropriate strategic WfD priorities and measures areclearly set and accompanied by well formulatedimplementation plans, budgets and routine monitoring.However, actual implementation of those strategies andplans still has a long way to go before the intendedoutcomes are achieved. The suggested actions discussedin this report are aimed at initiating a constructivedialogue around further improving Turkey’sWfD system,particularly the implementation of the government’sstrategies and plans. SABER WfD findings imply that forstrengthening the Strategic Framework dimension of

WfD policies and institutions in the country, bothgovernment and non government leaders shouldexercise sustained advocacy for WfD, and rely onroutine, institutionalized processes to collaborate on aneconomy wide WfD policy agenda.

The main body for the TurkishWfD structure is the Boardof Vocational Education (BVE), composed of therepresentatives of related ministries, public institutionsand agencies, employers and workers. But reaching amutual agreement between all parties at the BVE hasproven to be highly unlikely. Government agenciesgenerally prefer to operatewithin the clear scope of theirorganizational mandate, and non state stakeholders areless vocal and seldom heard. It can be, nevertheless, saidthat industry and NGOs participate in the preparation ofeducational programs through their representatives. Thestrong organizational boundaries make it particularlyhard for Turkey to establish a major apex level body forWfD to ensure institutionalized and sustained leadershipand coordination, but improved communication,coordination, and collaboration among stakeholders canstill be achieved within the existing structure by definingclear and measurable targets for each stakeholder, andundertaking close monitoring of these targets.

As regards System Oversight, Turkey has benefited agreat deal from the EU alignment process, and managedto establish clear and attainable standards for differentaspects of WfD by developing a national qualificationsframework. However, cooperation on strategicinitiatives that may exemplify the fostering of linkagesbetween employment and education & training islimited.

More information on the supply, demand (of firms) andlabor market returns of technical, cognitive andbehavioral skills in Turkey is needed, with a view tohelping inform future policy making. Turkey has thecapacity to collect relevant data, but needs to improvethe evaluation of such data and use the informationeffectively. In this respect, Turkey needs to strengthenthe evidence base needed for designing policies in theseareas, compiling data and information and sharing themwith key actors and stakeholders. With the strongleadership of the government and the support ofinternational institutions (i.e., OECD, World Bank, EU),Turkey can establish a fully functioning system forevidence based policy making. As Turkey has beenpartnering with such institutions for a long time, it maybenefit from the international best practices identified



by these institutions in structured and continuous globaland regional analyses.

To ensure the sustainability of funding from both publicand private sources, the efficiency and equity of thesystem may be improved through (1) incorporating intothe funding mechanism efficiency criteria such as thejob placement rate of training providers, and (2)periodically reviewing the outcomes of the fundingmechanism. The government is seeking contributionsfrom the private sector for the funding of WfD activities.Accompanying the decentralization of decision makingfor WfD activities, partnerships at the local level shouldbe prioritized and incentivized more strongly. During thelast decade Turkey has successfully established newinstitutions through which testing and certification ofoccupational qualifications can be undertaken, but thetransition to the new system is ongoing as of 2012. AsTurkey develops its own National QualificationsFramework (NQF), building links between the NQF, theformal education system and prior (mostly non formal)learning will be a major challenge.

For TVET students, Turkey has been working to establishflexible pathways for skills acquisition as well asimproving public perception of TVET through efficientuse of information seminars, career days,entrepreneurship conferences, lifelong learningseminars, establishment of VET Information Centers, etc.The Ministry of National Education’s (MoNE) NationalCareer Information System portal is a useful tool forgeneral and TVET students and graduates as they pursuea career. TVET streams at the secondary level may befurther enhanced to establish flexible pathways touniversity (6th level) and post secondary vocationalschool (5th level) courses. Turkey may also benefit frominternational experience by giving VET studentsopportunities to choose academically or vocationallyoriented programs at the university level.

In order to facilitate lifelong learning through skillscertification and recognition of prior learning, mostcertificates for technical and vocational programs wouldneed to be recognized by the NQF. The VocationalQualifications Authority (VQA) has been promotingrecognition of prior learningwithin the context of the lawno 5544. Starting from 2009, applicants thinking theyhave adequate occupational proficiency in a related fieldand the minimum eligibility conditions can to take theexams of accredited certification agencies to get

certified. However, as of 2012, Turkey should clarifywhether the certificates obtained from vocational andtechnical high schools and vocational colleges will bedirectly recognized by the NQF, and whether VETgraduates will be asked by the VQA to renew theircertifications in the coming years. Reconciliation of theoutputs of the education system with the requirementsto be determined by the NQF is a priority. Efficiency infunding can be improved by increasing the schoolingrates, providing adult workers with more opportunitiesfor further training, and investing in early education.

Granting autonomy to public institutions is one approachtaken by various countries to improve the performanceof public institutions in terms of Service Delivery. Turkeycould consider an approach to themanagement of publictraining institutions that combines incentives andautonomy, as was done in the school grants programunder the Secondary Schools project, where schooladministrations were allowed to use allocated resourcesfor procurement of goods and services.

Integrating industry and expert input into the design anddelivery of public training programs would be animportant step in the Turkish WfD system, as almost allindustry and training institutions are willing tocollaborate with the related government agencies.Turkey may boost system performance by strengtheningthe nature of the links between public traininginstitutions and industry partners, and between trainingand research institutions. Currently, examples of suchpartnerships are limited.

In TVET, MoNE has efficient systems for evaluatingperformance. For example, Turkey has developedcompetency based and modular VET curricula, andimprovements in the quality of the vocational technicalsecondary education curricula were identified throughan Assessment of the Beneficiaries of the CurriculumReform of the Secondary Education Project. The study,undertaken in 2012 and aimed at assessing thesecondary education curricula in Turkey, was conductedthrough an analysis and comparison of the existing andprevious curricula, and a field survey. The revisedcurricula were generally judged appropriate with respectto the dimensions of teaching, learning process,measurement and evaluation, but a clearly definedphilosophy and learning theory underlying the curriculareform was found to be lacking.



4. Aligning Workforce Development to KeyEconomic and Social PrioritiesWfD is not an end in itself but an input toward broaderobjectives – of boosting employability and productivity;of relieving skills constraints on business growth anddevelopment; and of advancing overall economic growthand social wellbeing. This chapter briefly introducesTurkey’s socio economic aspirations, priorities andreforms before presenting the detailed SABER WfDfindings on Strategic Framework and their policyimplications.

Socioeconomic Aspirations, Priorities andReforms

Over the last three decades, Turkish governments havebeen giving utmost importance to WfD reforms toachieve and sustain economic development, humandevelopment, and social inclusion. The governmentshave continued the EU alignment process, and amendedmost of the laws in line with the EU acquis, and relied onan export based growth model focusing on the EU as themain trading partner.

9 After 2012, a Vocational and Technical Education Strategy Document andAction Plan (for the 2014 2018 period) was developed with the participationof all relevant stakeholders under the coordination of MoNE. Aiming to definethe necessary policies, measures and actions to create a rational andimplementable VET system in Turkey, the Strategy is structured over threemain axes: 1) “Accessibility of VET”, which covers issues of awareness of theimportance and accessibility to VET among the public (including disadvantagesgroups), the development of transparent and flexible pathways to ensure

Five year Development Plans constitute the mainstrategic vision and objectives of Turkey. The 8th (20012005), 9th (2007 2013), and 10th Development Plans(2014 2018) have underlined the overall scope of WfDunder the Employment and Working Life, and Educationchapters, in line with the macroeconomic situation andgrowth projections. Developing a skilled labor force hasbeen a common goal of all development plans.

The legal framework for general and vocational &technical education has been changed from time to timeto incorporate the strategic priorities and key reforms(see Box 1 for details of the main legislation).

The main apex level body of the Government in TVET isthe Board of Vocational Education (BVE), which wasestablished by the Vocational Education Law. Itcomprises representatives from government,employees, employers and other social partners. Afterthe amendment of the Vocational Education Law in2001, MoNE issued a new regulation in 2002 (no:2002/55) regarding implementation of the law, whichfocused on establishing a suitable environment andframework for better vocational and technical educationin every region of the country. The regulation focused onthe important role of the Provincial Vocational EducationBoards in aligning education and employment activitiesat the provincial level with all stakeholders.

The government’s increasing interest in initiating keyWfD reforms led to the development of severalimportant strategy documents: MoNE’s VET Action Plan(2008 2012), MoNE’s Lifelong Learning StrategyDocument (2009 2013), MoNE’s Strategic Plan (20102014), the Industry Strategy Document (2010 2014), andMoNE’s VET Strategy Document (2013 2017).9

The conflux of these laws and strategy documents set outTurkey’s WfD reform agenda, which was aimed at (i)improving the quality and accessibility of education forthe whole population so as to build a competent laborforce, and (ii) strengthening the link between educationand employment to boost economic development. Tostrengthen completion rates and develop skills suitable

vertical and horizontal transfers, and the promotion of cooperation in R&Dactivities; 2) “Building Capacity in VET”, which covers competencies in VET,national occupational standards, education programs in line with relevantproficiencies, vocational and career guidance, and quality assurance; 3) “VETand Employment”, which focuses on improving the basic skills of VET studentsand graduates, facilitating workplace based training, further enhancingcreativity, innovation, occupational safety and security, and domestic andinternational mobility of the workforce.

Box 1 – Main WfD Legislation

Primary Education and Training Law (No. 222, establishedin 1961, amended in 1997 with Law no. 4306)

National Education Prime Law (No. 1739, established in1973, amended in 1997 with Law no. 4306)

Higher Education Law (No. 2547 established in 1981)

Vocational Education Law (No. 3308, established in 1986,amended in 2001 with Law no. 4702)

Vocational Qualification Authority Law (No. 5544,established in 2006)

.

Private Education Institutions Law (No. 5580, establishedin 2007)



for the labor market, the Government has focused onimproving vocational education and training (VET)through various projects and programs that target keyareas such as links with the labor market, teacher qualityand curriculum design. Specific projects includeStrengthening the Vocational Education and TrainingSystem (SVET) Project (2002 07), Modernization ofVocational Education and Training (MVET) Project (200306), and Improving Human Resources throughVocational Education and Training (IKMEP) Project(2008 10), Increasing the Schooling of Girls Project KEP(2011 2013), Strengthening School to Work TransitionProject SOS (2010 2012), Applied Training in Hotelmanagement and Tourism Project WEST (2011 2012),Project for Maritime Training and RelatedRecommendations (METALS) (2011 2013), Adaptation ofECVET Credit Transfer System in Rail Systems OperationProject (RAILVET) (2011 2013), Developing VocationalSkills Project (MESGEP)(2011 2015).10

In line with the priorities defined by the government, theVocational Qualifications Authority (VQA) wasestablished in 2006 with the task of determining thenational qualifications based on the occupationalstandards in technical and vocational fields, andimplementing activities related to audit, measurementand assessment, and certification. The main duty of VQAis to establish and operate the “national vocationalqualifications system”.

Though developing a skilled labor force has been acommon goal of all development plans and the mainstrategy documents, the economic crisis in 2008 madethe government prioritize its efforts towards increasinglabor force participation and employment, as well asimproving labor productivity. The governmentresponded to the crisis with a series of arrangementsknown as “employment packages”, which includedmonetary incentives for firms to keep the currentworkers on the payroll and recruit new ones. TheMinistry of Labor and Social Security was given the mainresponsibility for implementing the employmentpackages and the Turkish Employment Agency (ISKUR)assumed the financing responsibility.

Maybe themajor step taken by the government in recentyears was the establishment of an Action Plan forStrengthening the Linkages between Employment and

10 An additional project for “Improving the Quality of VET in Turkey” waslaunched in late 2012 with an implementation schedule of two years.

Vocational Education in 2010. The Action Plan wasprepared under the coordination of theMinistry of Laborand Social Security (MoLSS), and it is still operational. Itaims at (i) providing vocational and technical training inaccordance with the requirements of the labor market,(ii) strengthening the relationship between educationand employment, (iii) establishing a clear understandingof lifelong learning in the labor market, and (iv)increasing the employability of the workforce by way ofeliminating occupational illiteracy (see Box 2 for furtherdetails).

Box 2 – Priorities of the Action Plan for Strengthening theLinkages between Employment and Vocational Education

1. Drawing up the national qualifications framework,

2. Updating and bringing the curricula into conformity withthe national occupational standards,

3. Making periodical analyses and assessments of therequirements of the labor market,

4. Improving the vocational and technical trainingenvironment, raising the quality of the teachers anddesigning a new school administration system,

5. Accreditation of vocational education and traininginstitutions,

6. Cooperation in the implementation of instrumentsdeveloped by the EU regarding mobility, qualificationsand vocational education,

7. Strengthening cooperation in raising the effectiveness ofvocational skills courses,

8. Developing incentive mechanisms for the employment ofvocational and technical education graduates andVocational Qualification Certificate holders; andproviding incentives for them to start their own business,including by eliminating inconsistencies in the legislationfor the start up of businesses,

9. Improving cooperation within the scope of thememorandum on cooperation and understanding in thefield of vocational knowledge, guidance and counselingservices.

The recovery that started in the second quarter of 2009(as a result of both the recovery of international marketsand the positive effects of the employment packages),brought down the unemployment rate from 14% in 2009to 11.9% in 2010 and 9.8% in 2011. To maintain the



momentum, the government amended the relevantlegislation for labor markets—with the bundled Laws No.6111 (2011), and No. 6287 (2012)—to improve thecapacity of the relevant institutions to implement theemployment packages.

SABER WfD Ratings on the StrategicFrameworkIn the SABER WfD framework, the role ofWfD in realizingTurkey’s socio economic aspirations materializesthrough actions to advance the following three PolicyGoals: (i) setting a strategic direction for WfD; (ii)fostering a demand led approach in WfD; and (iii)ensuring coordination among key WfD leaders andstakeholders. The ratings for these Policy Goals arepresented and explained below, followed by a reflectionon their implications for policy dialogue.

Based on data collected by the SABER WfDquestionnaire, Turkey receives an overall rating of 2.9(Emerging) on the Strategic Framework dimension (seefigure 10). This score is the average of the ratings for theunderlying Policy Goals relating to: (i) Setting a Directionfor WfD (3.0); (ii) Fostering a Demand led Approach toWfD (2.8); and (iii) Strengthening Critical Coordinationfor WfD (3.0). The explanation for these ratings on thePolicy Goals and their implications follow below. Thescores reflect the fact that Turkey has been successful inarticulating a strategic direction for WfD, in fostering ademand driven approach to WfD and in coordinating theroles and activities of WfD actors.

Figure 10: SABER WfD Ratings of the Strategic FrameworkDimension

Note: see figure 2 for an explanation of the scale on the horizontalaxis. Source: based on analysis of the data collected using theSABER WfD questionnaire.

Policy Goal 1: Setting a Strategic Direction forWfD

Leaders play an important role in crystalizing a strategicvision for WfD appropriate to the country’s uniquecircumstances and opportunities. Their advocacy andcommitment attract partnership with stakeholders forthe common good, builds public support for keypriorities in WfD, and ensures that critical issues receivedue attention in policy dialogue. Taking these ideas intoaccount, Policy Goal 1 assesses the extent to which apexlevel leaders in government and in the private sectorprovide sustained advocacy for WfD priorities throughinstitutionalized processes.

Turkey is rated at the Established level on setting astrategic direction for WfD, with an overall score of 3.0.This score implies a sustained advocacy for WfD at thetop leadership level, through articulating a strategicdirection (3.0), and maintaining a strategic focus anddecisions by the WfD champions (3.0). The rating is notat the advanced level because, even though thegovernment has exercised sustained advocacy for WfD,the business community’s involvement in setting astrategic direction has been limited. The government hastaken specific action on various strategic WfD prioritiesthrough a range of interventions, but these are not wellintegrated and their monitoring has been conductedthrough ad hoc, rather than routine and systematicreviews.

Advocacy for WfD to support economic developmentcomes from the government’s strategic focus anddecisions by WfD champions from the public and privatesectors. The Council of Ministers is the driving force insetting the strategy, but there is no single institutionresponsible in Turkey for WfD issues. Over the lastdecade, government leaders have enjoyed the benefit ofa single party government elected for consecutive terms,thus providing ample opportunity for exercisingsustained advocacy for WfD. The support from nongovernment leaders made collaboration on the WfDpolicy agenda possible for selected industries oreconomic sectors, but the advocacy exercised by thenon government champions for WfD activities has beenad hoc and mainly project based.

As a result of the national consensus on improving thequality of the workforce, the government reactivated theBVE in 2001 at the central level (through Law no. 4702).



Provincial Vocational Education Boards (PVEBs) 11 thatwere established in all the 81 provinces (in accordancewith Law no: 3308, dated 1986) were given a mandate totackle the issue at the local level. Representatives of theprivate sector and trade unions participated in the BVEmeetings at the central level, the PVEB meetings in theprovinces, and the Sectoral Committee meetings of theVQA (as well as the board meetings of ISKUR), andcontributed to the decision making process.

Project based advocacy helped in the establishment ofkey institutions for WfD as well. As a result of studiesinitiated under the SVET project, the VQA wasestablished in 2006 to lead the process of establishing anNQF, occupational standards, and structures for thetesting and certification of skills. VQA has started settingthe standards for a high quality workforce, with frequentinteraction with the private sector and employeeassociations.

Although Turkey has managed to establish a solidframework and key institutions for WfD, monitoring ofthe implementation of the specific actions related tostrategic WfD priorities has been mainly through ad hocreviews. One example is MoNE’s comprehensive VETWorkshop of 2012. Conducted with the participation ofall stakeholders, including representatives of relevantgovernment agencies and the private sector, academics,and NGOs, the workshop focused on defining problemsin the implementation of policies and programs, but norigorous follow up was initiated thereafter.

Private sector WfD champions have also initiatedactivities, such as Koç Holding’s ‘Vocational School is aNational Matter’ Project, implemented between 2006and 2013 in 250 secondary VET schools, covering 8,000students. The project provided financial support,internships in companies, and coaching services, with theaim of promoting the VET system through raisingawareness and developing a good model for morequalified and skilled VET graduates. The scope of theproject was expanded before closing, and responsibilityfor project implementation was transferred to thePrivate Sector Volunteers Association.

11 Provincial Vocational Education Boards were merged with ProvincialEmployment Boards in 2008 with Law no: 5763.

Policy Goal 2: Fostering aDemand ledApproach toWfD

Effective advocacy for WfD requires credibleassessments of the demand for skills, engagement ofemployers in shaping the country’s WfD agenda andincentives for employers to support skills development.Policy Goal 2 incorporates these ideas and benchmarksthe system according to the extent to which policies andinstitutional arrangements are in place to: (i) establishclarity on the demand for skills and areas of criticalconstraint; and (ii) engage employers in setting WfDpriorities and enhancing skills upgrading for workers.

Turkey is rated at the Emerging level for Fostering a

Demand led Approach to WfD with an average score of2.8. The scores for the policy topics vary as follows: (i)overall assessment of economic prospects and skillimplications (4.0), (ii) identification of critical skillsconstraints in priority economic areas (3.0), (iii)recognition of the roles of employers and industry (3.0),(iv) provision of skills upgrading incentives for employers(2.0), and (v) monitoring of incentive programs (2.0).

The high score for “overall assessment of economicprospects and skill implications” reflects the fact thatboth the government and other WfD stakeholdersconduct routine assessments of the country's economicprospects and skill implications for key growth sectors,based on multiple data sources. A number ofemployment studies have been conductedindependently on the links between employment andeducation, with the findings being reflected in thepreparation of the national employment strategy.

In 2002, the Government initiated the five year SVETproject with support from the EU to design a newnational vocational standards system developed incooperation with the industrial sector and other socialpartners. SVET aimed to create (i) institutionaldevelopment programs that provide high qualityeducation for school administrators and teachers, and (ii)a new certification system to ensure consistency in thetraining standards (OECD 2007) (see Box 3). Under theSVET project, systematic monitoring of the demand forskills, qualifications and competencies in the provinciallabor market was initiated through a Labor Market andSkills Needs Survey between 2005 and 2006.



The SVET project was followed by the Modernization ofVocational Education and Training Project (MVET, 200306), which included initiatives to improve VET teacherquality, such as the introduction of VET teachercompetencies; development of modular curricula basedon competencies; seminars on student centerededucation and basic skills in select provinces; and qualityassurance based on the European Network System(OECD, 2013).

In 2010, to balance demand and supply in the jobmarket,the Specialized Occupational Development Centers(UMEM) Project was initiated to design and implementVET programs in line with the demands of the privatesector. 12 A formal assessment has been conducted byacademics and think tanks (TOBB University and theEconomic Policy Research Foundation of Turkey—TEPAV) under the UMEM project, and labor marketneeds analyses were implemented in 19 pilot provinces.

Identification of critical skills constraints in priorityeconomic sectors is at an emerging stage in Turkey. Thegovernment or WfD stakeholders tend to identify criticalskills constraints in priority economic sectors on the basisof ad hoc assessments. In 2012, MoNE evaluated the VETsystem and identified the key problems through acomprehensive VET Workshop with the participation ofall stakeholders, including representatives of relevantgovernment agencies, the private sector, academics, andNGOs. The critical skills constraints were defined as thelack of relevant skill building activities under trainingprograms, insufficient on the job training activities, andlimited chances for the students to meet with experts intheir field (MoNE, 2012a). Unfortunately, such initiativeshave not been sustained, and there is still no unified andstandardized process to identify skills constraints amongdifferent sectors.

The roles of employers and industry are clearlyrecognized, bringing Turkey to an established level.Employers help define WfD priorities on a routine basisand are making some contributions in selected areas toaddress the skills implications of major policy decisions.As for the role of employers and industry in definingstrategic WfD priorities, employer organizations sharetheir demands and priorities with local authorities byparticipating in regular meetings of provincial VET and

12 More than 160 thousand people across the country’s 81 provinces havebeen trained under these programs between 2011 and 2014. About 95

employment boards. Employers are also represented inprovincial employment and VET boards, and providefeedback to the labor market analyses of ISKUR. Anexample of the role played by employers and industrycan be seen in the annual labor force training programsthat the provincial ISKUR Directorates prepare. Theseprograms and any changes to themmust be approved bythe PEVEBs. Employers and industry representatives arerepresented in these boards and are part of the decisionmaking process. However, employers’ and industry’scontact with the government at the central level takesplace on an ad hoc basis. While government agenciesalmost always collect the comments and contributions ofnon government WfD stakeholders on the plans andprograms, and their implementation, the relevantministries almost always take the final decisions,

thousand of the participants who successfully completed the program wereemployed as of June 2014

Box 3 SVET Strengthening the Vocational Educationand Training System Project

The SVET Project has been implemented in a total of 145pilot institutions in 30 provinces of Turkey, with the aim ofestablishing a more advanced vocational education andtraining (VET) system that meets EU standards. Within theframework of the project, which has a budget of 58.2millionEuros, various activities are conducted, ranging fromdeveloping training standards and VET modules to trainingschool principals, teachers, and students, and establishingVET Information Centers. More than 5000 modulesdeveloped within the framework of SVET resulted in a windof change in all the vocational education institutions. Therewere also training activities organized as part of SVET.School and training center principals and teachers attendedtraining courses on curriculum and module development aswell as on dissemination. Around 15,000 teachers of formaland non formal VET institutions, as well as general highschools in the project's 30 pilot provinces including theirsub provinces, participated in the training. More than20,000 people participated in the training activitiesorganized within the framework of the project. The projectprovided the pilot institutions with the opportunity tocooperate and exchange knowledge with similarinstitutions established in the EU. Accordingly, around1,500 people including school and training centermanagers, teachers, students and social partners visited100 partner institutions.



(usually) without taking the suggestions of otherstakeholders into account.

While the Government started relying more on ALMPs in2008 to upgrade the skills of the unemployed, noincentives have yet been provided to formal and informalsector employers to develop and upgrade the skills oftheir employees.

Policy Goal 3: Strengthening Critical Coordinationfor Implementation

Ensuring that the efforts of multiple stakeholdersinvolved in WfD are aligned with the country’s keysocioeconomic priorities is an important goal of strategiccoordination. Such coordination typically requiresleadership at a sufficiently high level to overcomebarriers to cross sector or cross ministerial cooperation.Policy Goal 3 examines the extent to which policies andinstitutional arrangements are in place to formalize rolesand responsibilities for coordinated action on strategicpriorities.

Turkey is rated at the Emerging level for StrengtheningCritical Coordination for WfD with a score of 3.0, and thescores for all the components of this policy goal got thesame score: (i) role of government and ministries (3.0),(ii) role of non government WfD stakeholders (3.0), and(iii) coordination for the implementation of strategicWfDmeasures (3.0).

There are numerous governmentministries and agenciesthat have legally defined roles and responsibilities forWfD in Turkey but their mandates overlap in a few areas.Coordination of WfD strategies and programs occursthrough BVE which has sometimes faced difficulties inimproving communication and enhancing collaborationamong ministries and agencies.

MoNE is the central authority for primary and secondaryeducation. Vocational training policies and activities aremostly carried out byMoNEwithin the framework of VETLaw (No. 3308), which came into force in 1986. The LawNo. 4702 of 2001 amending the VET Law broughtchanges to the system, establishing new and strong linksfor co operation with industry and commerce

MoLSS and the Ministry of Development also coordinateinstitutional strategies and prepare long termdevelopment plans at the national level. The TurkishEmployment Agency (ISKUR) is an affiliated institution tothe MoLSS, implementing the unemployment insurancefund and ALMP activities. VQA, which is also affiliated to

theMoLSS, develops occupational standards and lays thegroundwork for the vocational accreditation processes,during which it works with national institutions such asthe Turkish Accreditation Board and Turkish StandardsInstitute.

In addition to these, the Council of Higher Education(CoHE) is a fully autonomous institution responsible forthe planning, coordination, governance and supervisionof higher education (including post secondary VETprograms).

While the target population of each of these agencies isdefined, their responsibilities may overlap when thetarget population is moving to the territory of anotheragency or when they implement projects together (i.e.

Box 4 – Specialized Vocational Training Centers UMEMProject

UMEM is a unique public, private, and universitypartnership project, aiming to provide vocational coursesand on the job programs for the unemployed in line withthe skill needs of the labor market.

The partners of the UMEM project are theMinistry of Laborand Social Security, Ministry of National Education, TurkishEmployment Agency, Union of Chambers and CommodityExchanges (TOBB), and TOBB University of Economics andTechnology.

Courses for the unemployed are designed according to therequirements of the private sector, which is positioned atthe center of the Vocational Training system through theChambers of Industry and Commerce.

UMEM Project also focuses on capacity building forconducting effective labor market analyses, as well as fordesigning and implementing employment and VET policies.Local labor market analyses are being conducted for thefirst time in Turkey under UMEM. Labor market needsanalyses were implemented in 19 pilot provinces. UMEMhas a very flexible structure (like the ALMP activities) thatallows firms to:

get involved in the creation of the course curriculumchoose the trainees they want to employget their own foremen to be trainers for the courses,observe trainees during the entire processprovide in house training

As of January 2012, 10,445 firms had had 50,870 interns;1,987 courses had started, with 35,001 unemployedapplicants; 29,247 trainees had participated in the courses;and 17,842 of them had graduated from 1,434 of thecourses. Successful graduates were employed.



the UMEM project that ISKUR, MoNE’s Vocational andTechnical Education General Directorate and Life LongLearning General Directorate implemented together –see Box 4).

In Turkey, no non government WfD stakeholder has alegally defined role or responsibility. Arrangementsclarifying the roles of non government WfD actors mayhelp establish an environment for coordination amongall stakeholders. Their roles, responsibilities andcoordination mechanisms with government are definedto some extent, but the strong control of the governmentagencies over the WfD system remains. SWOT analysesof several reform initiatives and supporting documentsunderline the lack of effective coordination betweenstakeholders as a weakness of the system, but policyrecommendations still do not include active measures toinclude non governmental stakeholders in decisionmaking and implementation (MoNE, 2013).

Strategic WfD measures are accompanied by animplementation plan and budget, but coordination inimplementation andmonitoring of progress occurs on anad hoc basis.

Implications of the FindingsSABER WfD findings imply that strengthening of theStrategic Framework dimension of WfD policies andinstitutions in the country requires both government andnon government leaders to exercise sustained advocacyfor WfD, and rely on routine, institutionalized processesto collaborate on an economy wide WfD policy agenda.

The BVE continues to be the main body in the WfDstructure; it takes decisions on the issues ofimplementation of VET programs at all formal, nonformal, and apprenticeship education institutions. WhileBVE’s decisions are notified to MoNE, other institutionsprefer to operate in their own territories to fulfill theirown mandates rather than implementing a widerprogram under the direction of MoNE. Restating BVE'srole as the apex level body for WfD to ensureinstitutionalized and sustained leadership andcoordination may not be a priority for Turkey due to thepublic administrative structure and strong organizationalboundaries; however, improved communication,coordination, and collaboration among stakeholders canbe achieved within the existing structure by definingclear and measurable targets for each stakeholder, andundertaking close monitoring of these targets.

The EU alignment process has been very beneficial forTurkey to establish clear and attainable standards fordifferent aspects of WfD (i.e. developing a nationalqualifications framework), but still more information isneeded on the supply of and demand (from firms) fortechnical, cognitive and behavioral skills in Turkey so asto help inform future policy making. Turkey needs tostrengthen its processes to compile and share data inorder to generate a strong evidence basis for the designof WfD policies. Turkish institutions (both public andprivate) have adequate capacities for collecting andevaluating data, and they have conducted in depthstudies where a large amount of valuable data wascollected (e.g. Determining Human Resource Needs ofTurkey, SETA, 2012). Turkey should be able toinstitutionalize these data collection mechanisms,conduct its own evaluation of such data, and share thecollected data with internal and external stakeholdersfor further analysis, thereby cultivating an environmentfor evidence based policy making. These efforts can beenhanced through integrated Labor Market andEducational Management Information Systems.

In connection with such efforts to improve data analysis,Turkey may consider further enhancing its cooperationwith international institutions (i.e. OECD, World Bank,EU) to be a part of structured and continuous global orregional analyses that can be used in the policy makingprocess. The European Center for the Development ofVocational Training, for example, uses the detailedanalyses conducted by member countries for policydevelopment. As a part of the EU alignment process,Turkey can make better use of these mechanisms andexperiences.



5. Governing the System for WorkforceDevelopmentAn important function of WfD authorities is to fosterefficient and equitable funding of investments inworkforce development, to facilitate effective skillsacquisition by individuals and to enable employers tomeet their demand for skilled workers in a timelymanner. The objective is to minimize systemicimpediments to skills acquisition andmismatches in skillssupply and demand. This chapter begins with a briefdescription of how the WfD system is organized andgoverned before presenting the detailed SABER WfDfindings on System Oversight and their policyimplications.

Overall Institutional LandscapeSeveral bodies assuming different responsibilities foreach segment of WfD (see Figure 11). Initial VocationalEducation and Training (IVET) is provided at thesecondary education level by Vocational and TechnicalHigh Schools and multi program high schools , which aredirectly governed by MoNE.

The Vocational and Technical Education Directorate ofMoNE (Girls Technical, Boys Technical GDs, Trade andTourism Education GD and Health Affairs Department)were merged under Vocational and Technical GeneralDirectorate in 2011 which is in charge of formal

13 Level 6 refers to the bachelor’s degree in four year university programs.

education; and the General Directorate forApprenticeship and Non Formal Education wasrestructured as the Life Long Learning (LLL) GeneralDirectorate, which is in charge of non formal educationand apprenticeship training. MoNE also oversees PublicEducation Centers, which provide educational activitiesconducted outside of formal education institutions.These centers not only provide continuing vocationaleducation and training (CVET) to people older than 17,but also offer socio cultural courses and activitiesincluding literacy courses. ISKUR, which is affiliated withthe MoLSS, is also responsible for ALMPs, and itsactivities are directed towards the employed andunemployed.

The processes for establishing occupational standards,the NQF, structures for testing and certification of skillsand the responsibility of training accreditation aregoverned by the Vocational Qualifications Authority(VQA).

The European Qualification Framework (EQF), whichconsists of 8 reference levels13, was modelled as a part ofTurkey’s alignment process with the EU, and competencybased modular VET curricula have been developed inaccordance with these reference levels. The first 4reference levels of the EQF are handled byMoNE and therest are under the responsibility of CoHE. VQA, whichwas assigned the role of national coordination unit forthe EQF, handles all 8 reference levels. VQA also workstogether with MoNE and CoHE as a coordinatorinstitution to improve the NQF.

Governance at the sector level remains weak as thesector strategies have been updated very frequently, andindependently by each of the stakeholders, which hasmade it harder to address the needs of the economy in aholistic manner. Though a strategic approach wasinitiated in 2011 with the Action Plan for Strengtheningthe Linkages between Employment and VocationalEducation (displayed in Box 2), the plan is not supportedby either an agreed timeframe or adequate human andfinancial resources. The overall WfD system still fallsunder the mandate of several ministries and publicagencies regulated by different laws; decisions arefragmented across the Board of Education (for secondarylevel vocational education), the BVE (for VET training),

Figure 11: Turkish WfD System

Source: Author’s construction



and CoHE (for community college and university leveltraining).

Few actions are taken by the above mentionedstakeholders to implement common strategies that areapproved by BVE, which has not been able to effectivelycoordinate implementation of supply side policies at thesectoral level. There is a critical need to review roles andresponsibilities to ensure a clear division of labor andcomplementarity among government agencies in termsof policymaking, funding, accreditation, quality control,curriculum development and hiring/up skilling oftrainers.

As of 2012 there are several types of upper secondaryschools n Turkey (see Box 5). Students tend to choosemore prestigious and rewarding programs both ingeneral and vocational education (i.e. science andAnatolian upper secondary schools), as well asprestigious private schools. Students take acomprehensive test at the end of 8th grade. The testresults and students’ academic performance are takeninto consideration when placing them in science,Anatolian, and/or prestigious private upper secondaryschools. This selection process that streams students intodifferent types of upper secondary schools according totheir abilities is likely to have an effect on theirsubsequent academic achievement.

Box 5 –Different School structures in Upper Secondary14General• General High Schools (public & private)• Anatolian High Schools (public)• Science High Schools (public & private)• Other High Schools (military, police, fine arts & sports, open

education, multi program)

Vocational (public)• Technical High Schools• Anatolian Vocational High Schools• Industrial Vocational High Schools• Agricultural Vocational High Schools• Anatolian Meteorological Vocational High Schools• Anatolian Cadastral Vocational High Schools• Commercial Vocational High Schools (+Anatolian)• Anatolian Health Vocational High Schools• Anatolian Hotel Management and Tourism Vocational High

Schools• Anatolian Mass Communications Vocational Schools

14 MoNE passed an internal mandate on April, 2014, to simplify the schoolvariety in VET, and merged the VET schools under Special VET Anatolian HighSchools and Vocational Distant Learning High School.

Vocational enrolment at the secondary education levelhas been growing in recent years but, due to the lack ofprestige and the lower quality of education associatedwith this sector, few students choose VET voluntarily asan alternative to general education (even for theAnatolian vocational schools). Though mechanisms existto change programs during upper secondary education,once students join the vocational and technical streams,it is very hard for them to change their fields of study inhigher education as the pathways within the system arelimited.

Funding for MoNE comes from general taxation, which isallocated to the Ministry, its high schools and trainingcenters through annual budgeting. Institutions affiliatedwith MoNE are governed through a centralized andhierarchical governance structure, with limitedparticipation from civil society and employers. In Turkey,public education spending is composed of the budget ofMoNE, universities, other institutions, andmunicipalities; and the spending of ISKUR on ALMPs iskept separately. The state plays a leading role in fundingthe education system in Turkey, and public spending oneducation has increased steadily over the last decade(from 3.3% of GDP to 3.9% of GDP). However, Turkey stillspends the least among OECD countries, which spend onaverage around 5% of their GDP on education) (TEPAV,2012).

69%

19%

10%

2%

MoNE UniversitiesOther Institutions Municipalities

Figure 12: Public Education Spending (2012)

Source: MoF statistics



Around 70% of public education spending is channeledthrough MoNE (around TL 40 billion in 2012), while 19%goes directly to the universities (around TL 10 billion)(see Figure 12). MoNE’s departments in charge of TVETreceive around 17% of the total budget allocations ofMoNE (14% for VET, and 3% for Life Long Learning).Teacher salaries account for around 75% of the publicbudget, while goods and services take another 15% andcapital expenditure 10%.

Public expenditure on education started to grow after2005, with annual per capita public expenditure oneducation increasing in real terms by 7.4 % till 2012. As aresult, by 2012, Turkey spent almost 80 percent more oneducation per capita in real terms compared to 2004.Though the ratio of public education expenditure to GDPcontinues to follow an upward trend, Turkey has not yetachieved equality in education. The expenditure perstudent was only about half the amount in lessdeveloped regions of Turkey, principally in thesoutheastern and eastern regions (World Bank, 2005;ETF, 2011). After conducting an efficiency analysis ofpublic spending in primary and secondary education inTurkey, OECD reported that Turkey did not obtain theexpected results from combined public and privatespending on education (OECD, 2007). While the total ofpublic and private education spending as a proportion ofGDP was approximately 7% in 2005, the bulk ofhousehold expenditure on education was spent onprivate tutoring in preparation for university and collegeentrance examinations (World Bank, 2005).

ISKUR receives funds from the general budget and theUnemployment Insurance Fund (UIF), which consists ofcontributions from employers (50%), employees (25%)and the state (25%). Starting from 2009, ISKUR's budgetallocations were significantly increased in order toimprove the quality and quantity of ALMP programs,with around 30% of the UIF’s previous year’s premiumrevenues now being used for WfD activities underISKUR’s control each year. The total funds for ISKUR’svocational training programs were increased to TL 1.5billion in 2012 (from TL 12 million in 2003). In 2012,ISKUR spent around TL 1.12 million on ALMPs.

SABER WfD Ratings on System OversightThe SABER WfD framework identifies three pertinentPolicy Goals corresponding to oversight mechanisms forinfluencing the choices of individuals, training providersand employers: (i) ensuring efficiency and equity in

funding; (ii) assuring relevant and reliable standards; and(iii) diversifying pathways for skills acquisition. Theratings for these Policy Goals are presented andexplained below, followed by a reflection on theirimplications for policy dialogue.

Based on data collected by the SABER WfD questionnaireTurkey receives an overall Emerging rating (2.5) forSystem Oversight (see Figure 13).

Figure 13: SABER WfD ratings of the “System Oversight”dimension

Note: see figure 2 for an explanation of the scale on the horizontalaxis.Source: based on analysis of the data collected using the SABER WfDquestionnaire.

This score is the average of the ratings for the underlyingpolicy goals, and it misses an Established rating due tothe low score of one of policy targets: ensuring efficiencyand equity of funding (2.3). Other policy goals under thisdimension are rated as Established: assuring relevantand reliable standards (2.6), and diversifying pathwaysfor skills acquisition (2.7). The explanation for theseratings and their implications follow below.

Policy Goal 4: Ensuring Efficiency and Equity inFunding

WfD requires a significant investment of resources by thegovernment, households and employers. To ensure thatthese resources are effectively used it is important toexamine the extent to which policies and institutionalarrangements are in place to: (i) ensure stable fundingfor effective programs in initial, continuing and targetedVET; (ii) monitor and assess equity in funding; and (iii)foster partnerships with employers for funding WfD.

Turkey is rated at the Emerging level on Policy Goal 4.The rating reflects the challenges in strengthening theefficiency and equity of the funding mechanisms of thedifferent governmental agencies undertaking WfDactivities. These challenges are counterbalanced throughthe stability of the funding mechanisms, the frequent



large scale projects designed to address the inequalitieswithin the system, and the willingness of the publicsector to increase the participation of the private sector.The ratings for each specific topic under this policy goalvary between 2.0 and 3.0 and they are presented indetail in Annex 2 and Annex 5.

The government relies on routine budgeting processes,based largely on the previous year’s budget, todetermine funding for IVET and CVET institutions andprograms. Funding of the governmental agencies thatprovide WfD activities is quite stable in Turkey. BothMoNE, CoHE, and ISKUR receive allocations from thecentral government for their ongoing activities. Inaddition, ISKUR spends approximately 30% of theprevious year’s premium revenues of the UIF for itsALMPs. Allocations to institutions from general taxationare largely based on the budget of the previous year, thenumber of enrolled students/trainees, and the profile ofthe population groups served. While this ensures thestability of funding, other criteria that could improveefficiency, such as program completion rates or jobplacement rates among graduates, are hardly used.

On the other hand, the government determinesrecurrent funding for IVET and CVET through a formalprocess of application and approval involving ma nly thepersonnel costs funding for CVET includes governmentsupport for programs that foster on the job training forSMEs. The government agencies produce annual reportson IVET and CVET, but within a reasonable time lag.

The level of monitoring and enhancing of equity infunding for training varies for IVET, CVET and ALMP. Formany years, the reviews on the impact of funding ontraining beneficiaries have focused mostly on trainingoutcomes. A rigorous impact evaluation of the vocationaltraining courses of ISKUR was conducted between 2010and 2011. ISKUR used the results of the evaluation, aswell as the lessons from international experience, tofurther strengthen its training programs and services.These improvements included: (i) improving therelevance of skills training; (ii) putting more emphasis onbehavioral skills; (iii) encouraging a more comprehensivejob search and expanding employment services; (iv)shifting the focus of resources and attention toward thehard to employ rather than the most educatedjobseekers; and (v) increasing the share of ISKUR coursescontracted out to private service providers andincreasing competition among them, while ensuring the

quality of providers and making them accountable forresults through performance based contracts.

In addition to efficiency, equity is another importantrequirement that should be fulfilled by governmentagencies when allocating public funds to various WfDactivities. In Turkey, for IVET and CVET activities, noformal review has been conducted on the impact of WfDfunding on the beneficiaries of the training programs.Yet, for the IVET programs there is a concern that thequality of the public institutions that provide educationand training activities is not consistent across thecountry. Measures are taken frequently by thegovernment to address this issue, one of the mostimportant being the Support to Human Developmentthrough Vocational Education and Training Project,which was implemented by CoHE in collaboration withMoNE. The government has also taken concerted actionto overcome inequalities through large scale programsand investment projects focusing on regionaldevelopment such as the East Anatolia DevelopmentProject. ISKUR has also designed special ALMPs forpeople that need special policies (disadvantaged) such asformer convicts, people with disabilities and peopleliving in less developed areas (i.e. Southeastern Anatolia)to promote equity in service delivery.

In order to ensure the financial contribution ofemployers and the private sector, the governmentfacilitates partnerships between training providers andemployers. The partnerships usually take place at thenational level, in line with the current structure of theWfD activities in Turkey, which are mainly administeredby central governmental organizations in Ankara.Employers are invited to contribute to the content of thetraining and to the development of standards andcurricula.

Policy Goal 5: Assuring Relevant and ReliableStandards

The WfD system comprises a wide range of trainingproviders offering courses at various levels in diversefields. An effective system of standards and accreditationenables students to document what they have learnedand employers to identify workers with the relevantskills. For Policy Goal 5 it is therefore important to assessthe status of policies and institutions to: (i) set reliablecompetency standards; (ii) assure the credibility of skillstesting and certification; and (iii) develop and enforce



accreditation standards for maintaining the quality oftraining provision.

Turkey scores at the Established level (2.6) for this PolicyGoal. The ratings for each specific topic under this policygoal vary between 2.0 and 4.0 and they are presented indetail in Annex 2 and Annex 5. The highest ranking isgiven to skills testing for major occupations (4.0).15

The country has established the institutions for definingoccupational standards, setting a qualificationsframework, and specifying and enforcing regulations fortesting and certification. Yet, these institutionalarrangements do not function at a desirable pace, andthe number of occupational standards established andsteps taken towards a functioning testing andcertification mechanism lag behind.

After its establishment, the VQA started developingoccupation standards and national competencies. Thepolicy dialogue on occupation standards, nationalcompetencies and the NQF currently engages numerousstakeholders through institutionalized processes. TheNQF covers a few occupations and a limited range of skilllevels. VQA has signed protocols with relevantstakeholders for the development of over 700occupational standards. By the end of 2012, 351 of themwere published in the Official Gazette forimplementation.16 Numerous stakeholders are engagedin setting competency standards for major occupations.For each occupation, VQA authorizes employer/industryoccupations, labor unions and/or professionaloccupational bodies to develop competency standards,which are evaluated by sector committees and finalizedby the Board of the VQA. Thus, the process forestablishing occupational standards is participatory inTurkey. While labor unions and professionaloccupational bodies participate in the development ofcompetency standards, the number of employerrepresentatives has been much higher. Some trainingproviders offer programs utilizing competency basedcurricula aligned to the agreed standards.

On the other hand, n 2012 there were concerns aboutthe pace of this process and the number of occupationsfor which standards established by the VQA can beimplemented. VQA also works on the NQF, which isprepared in line with the requirements of the EQF. More

15 Please see Annex 3: Rubrics for Scoring the SABER WfD Data for thedefinition of standards.16 This number is 572 as of November 2014.

time is needed to increase the number of occupations forwhich standards are established and connections to theNQF are formed.

VQA is also responsible for testing and subsequentcertification of national competencies which areprepared based on occupational standards. Certificationhas been ongoing from 2009. Certification agenciesauthorized by VQA (accredited in line with TS EN ISO/IEC17024 standards) can hold theoretical and empiricalexaminations to the applicants who have adequateoccupational proficiency in a given field. The applicantshould meet the minimum eligibility conditions to takethe exams. Successful applicants are provided with VQcertificates within the context of National QualificationFramework. While the Regulation for OccupationalProficiency Testing and Certification governs theseprocedures and principles, in 2012, however, the testingand certification was still in its infancy in Turkey, as itexisted for only six occupations, and certificates are notrequired for practitioners of the occupations.

Accreditation of training providers and training programsis not mandatory, as VQA is yet to introduce relevantregulations. VQA aims to accredit all institutions andprograms that provide training based on nationalcompetencies. In the near future independentaccreditation institutions authorized by the VQA willundertake voluntary accreditation using nationalaccreditation standards. The law no: 5544 specifies theestablishment of a quality assurance system within theNQF, but the system has not been established as of 2012.

In sum, Turkey does have institutions through whichtesting and certification of occupational qualificationscan be undertaken. However, these institutions areoperating at a timewhen the system is still in the processof being established. Both professional documents, suchas occupational standards, and legal documents, such asregulations, are currently being prepared. More politicalleadership and investment are required to hasten theseprocesses, complete the infancy period and enter a moremature phase for standard setting, testing andcertification.



Policy Goal 6: Diversifying Pathways for SkillsAcquisition

In dynamic economic environments workers need toacquire new skills and competencies as well as keep theirskills up to date throughout their working lives. They arebest served by a system of initial and continuingeducation and training that promotes lifelong learning byoffering clear and flexible pathways for transfers acrosscourses, progression to higher levels of training andaccess to programs in other fields. For those already inthe workforce, schemes for recognition of prior learningare essential to allow individuals to efficiently upgradetheir skills and learn new ones. Policy Goal 6 thereforeevaluates the extent to which policies and institutionsare in place to: (i) enable progression through multiplelearning pathways, including for students in TVETstreams; (ii) facilitate the recognition of prior learning;and (iii) provide targeted support services, particularlyamong the people that need special policies.

Turkey scores at an Established level (2.7) for Policy Goal6. The ratings for each specific topic under this policygoal vary between 2.0 and 3.0 and they are presented indetail in Annex 2 and Annex 5.

The NQF mapping is process is different than therecognition of prior learning, as it focuses on the supplyside, while the latter gives attention on the individuallearner and his or her prior learning needs to be checked,mapped and certified.

Although there are established pathways for TVET atsecondary and post secondary level, the certificationsgained at this level currently do not directly relate to theNQF. ISKUR has some programs for the people that needspecial policies and has started to offer job consultancyservices in 2012, which is an important component ofcareer development support.

In Turkey, vocational education at the secondary levelstarts after eight years of primary and secondaryschooling and is offered in various vocational andtechnical high schools (see Box 5 for details). Graduatesof these schools can pursue formal skills acquisitionbeyond the secondary level without having to pass theregular university entrance examination, but options arelimited to mostly 2 year vocational oriented programs inthe post secondary level colleges or 4 year programsserving as continuation of their own domain. Graduatesof secondary VET schools can also take the centraluniversity examination to enter four year undergraduate

programs, but their success level is low when comparedwith the graduates of Anatolian and science secondaryschools. In 2011, more than 50% of the graduates ofprivate general high schools, science and Anatolian highschools enrolled in an undergraduate program, while theoverall success rate for vocational school graduates was6% (See table 6).

The government has also aimed at improving the qualityand relevance of programs, and has undertaken jointpublic awareness initiatives/campaigns with the privatesector and NGOs to improve the public perception of VETthrough information seminars, career days,entrepreneurship conferences, lifelong learningseminars and establishment of VET Information Centersunder the Improving the Quality of VET in Turkey Project(METEK). The share of students in VET programs in thetotal number of students in secondary education hasincreased from 36% in 2005 2006 to 44% in 2011 2012;this suggests that these initiatives have worked well, yetthe initiatives were not subject to a formal review fortheir impact on diversifying learning pathways.

The government has also developed a modular system invocational and technical education (mostly at thesecondary level) so that students can design flexiblepathways for skills acquisition. MoNE has recentlylaunched the National Career Information System portalfor career guidance and counseling services. This systemwill be used for career planning purposes for all VETstudents and all individuals who are interested inparticipating in VET programs.



Table 6 : Applicants to Tertiary Education 2011

Applicant Undergrad.Programs (%)

PostSecondaryPrograms

(%)Grand Total* 1,759,403 20 14Total Applicants(High School)** 1,199,956 25 9General High (public) 768,400 21 10Gen. High (private) 30,027 56 3Anatolian 166,587 55 2Science 8,742 61 0Total Applicants(Vocational)** 533,512 6 27Teacher training*** 25,935 59 1Commerce 87,150 4 38Technical 49,621 12 33Industry 161,664 2 33Hotel M.& Tourism 10,300 16 30

* 184,690 of the applicants were enrolled in open education (distancelearning) programs (10%)** Total applicants includes the new graduates from various general andvocational schools and students that were enrolled in an undergraduateprogram in the previous years*** Teacher training programs at the tertiary level last 4 yearsSource: MoNE, 2012b

Although there are initiatives to enhance the publicimage of VET, especially at secondary and postsecondary levels, it was unknown as of 2012 whether thecertificates obtained from the vocational high schoolsand vocational colleges will be directly recognized by theNQF. There is an immediate need to reconcile theoutputs of the education system with the requirementsalready determined or yet to be determined by the NQFand to address recognition of prior learning, whichcurrently receives limited policy attention.

Implications of the FindingsMonitoring and enhancing equity in funding for trainingmay not be easy for MoNE due to its highly centralizedsystems. However, ISKUR has continued to introducereforms to address some of the challenges in enhancingequity and efficiency in funding for training. With theplanned amendments in ISKUR’s regulation defining theprocedures and principles for ALMPs, ISKURwill continueselecting the service providers on the basis of specificquality and performance criteria as well as the cost. Thenew regulation will assign more weight to quality in theselection of providers and introduce modules to thetraining programs to increase employability. Theregulation will also require training providers to provide

job placements for participants. The experiences ofISKUR can be taken into consideration for a system wideevaluation.

Turkey may benefit from the experiences of othercountries such as Singapore, which have successfullyredirected VET students to academic or vocationalprograms, including at the university level. In Singapore,sizable investments in a high quality TVET system overthe years, coupled with sustained attention to theemployability of graduates, have lowered socialresistance to TVET programs that the less academicallyinclined students enter after 10 years of generalschooling (Law, 2008).

To provide support services for skills acquisition byworkers, jobseekers and the disadvantaged, Turkey maysupport a comprehensive menu of services for furtheroccupational and career development, including onlineresources. ISKUR’s ALMPs for disadvantaged people suchas former convicts, people with disabilities and peopleliving in less developed areas (i.e. Southeastern Anatolia)can be expanded to the beneficiaries of social assistance.

In order to facilitate life long learning througharticulation of skills certification and recognition of priorlearning, most certificates for technical and vocationalprograms should be recognized by the NQF, andpolicymakers should pay sustained attention to therecognition of prior learning and provide the public withcomprehensive information on the subject. DevelopingVocational Skills Project (MESGEP) can be given as a goodexample.

There is strong justification for increased publicinvestment in pre primary, primary and secondaryeducation, as early failings in the Turkish educationsystem make later remediation difficult. Efficiency infunding mechanisms can be attained best whenopportunities for early education are caught, asremediation is costly, and full remediation is oftenimpossible. In addition, the system should also provideadult workers with more opportunities for furthertraining.

Turkey’s WfD strategies are targeted at achievingefficiency gains, but policy makers should be patient bywaiting for the outcomes of the current reform initiativesbefore initiating new ones.



6. Managing Service DeliveryTraining providers, both non state and government, arethe main channels through which the country’s policiesin WfD are translated into results on the ground. Thischapter therefore provides a brief overview of thecomposition of providers and the types of servicesavailable in the system before presenting the detailedSABER WfD findings on Service Delivery and their policyimplications.

Overview of the Delivery of TrainingServicesTurkey’s VET programs are primarily operated underMoNE and consist of formal and non formal educationaimed at providing training and education in line with thedemands of the labor market to enhance skills andemployability. The vocational education systemincludes: (i) Vocational and technical high schoolsproviding training in more than 130 occupations andleading to the qualification of specialized worker andtechnician; (ii) Apprenticeship training, which is acombination of mainly practical training provided inenterprises and theoretical training provided invocational education centers; and (iii) Informaleducation, which is provided primarily throughvocational education centers.

In 2012 upper secondary VET schools include 9th to 12thgrades and cover ages 14–17. Anatolian Vocational HighSchools employ foreign language preparation classes incompliance with the objectives of the curriculum, andnatural science and mathematics can be taught in aforeign language.

Formal VET comprises vocational and technical highschools that offer training in over 130 occupations, andmake up 45% of the total secondary school enrollment.Following secondary education, some VET graduatesapply for tertiary education programs, with the majorityof those admitted being placed in 2 year post secondary(associate) or 4 year distance education programs.

Upper secondary VET schools offer courses under avariety of branches such as industry, services, and socialservices. Notwithstanding the diversity of school typesand branches, the 9th grades of all secondary educationinstitutions teach the same (common) general education

17 ISCED is the framework developed by UNESCO and used to comparestatistics on the education systems of countries worldwide. It is an important

courses. In Grades 11 & 12, students spend most of theirtime on On the Job Training activities. Efforts have beenmade to improve the quality of infrastructure,equipment and training materials in VET schools, as wellas the teachers.

The Turkish higher education (tertiary) system consists ofuniversities and higher technology institutes (ISCED 5AB, 6).17 Universities and higher technology institutes aredivided into two groups in regard to administration andfinancing as public and private (foundation) universities.All higher education institutions are affiliated touniversities/ higher technology institutes, with theexception of some vocational schools at the postsecondary level that are run by foundations (ISCED 5B).Post secondary VET schools implement 2 year programsleading to an associate degree and the graduates ofsecondary schools can continue to such programs to getgraduated as a technician and they may then pursuefurther higher education by satisfying necessaryconditions.

Non formal education is delivered by MoNE’s PublicEducation Centers. During the economic crisis in 2008,the government gave ISKUR primary responsibility forimplementing ALMPs. The number of ISKUR’s ALMPparticipants increased from 30,000 (in 2008) to 464,000(in 2012), representing almost one fifth of the registeredunemployed.

ISKUR itself has been implementing 10 different targetedtraining programs for the unemployed from differentgroups of society such as those from SoutheasternAnatolia, women, the disabled, convicts, ex convicts andentrepreneurs (see Figure 14). In addition to ALMPs,ISKUR has increased the coverage and quality of itsservices by introducing Job and Vocational Counsellors,and linking receipt of social assistance benefits toregistration in ISKUR.

ISKUR has been working together with VQA to improvethe quality of training through the development of thenational vocational qualification system and, morerecently, through the selection of training providers onthe basis of specific quality and performance criteria. Anew regulation (to be published after 2012) willintroduce a number of initiatives to improve theeffectiveness of vocational training, including: (i) theaddition of new modules to training programs to

tool used to produce accurate data that reflect educational priorities andpolicies.



improve the employability of participants (e.g., jobsearch skills, interview techniques, and basic skills); (ii)rewards for job placement performance andaccreditation by the Vocational Qualification Institution,when awarding contracts to providers; and (iii) anincreased job placement rate requirement for jobguaranteed courses.

SABER WfD Ratings on Service DeliveryThe Policy Goals for this Dimension in the SABER WfDframework focus on the following three aspects ofservice delivery: (i) enabling diversity and excellence intraining provision; (ii) fostering relevance in publictraining programs; and (iii) enhancing evidence basedaccountability for results. The ratings for these threePolicy Goals are presented below and are followed by areflection on their implications for policy dialogue.

Based on data collected by the SABER WfDquestionnaire, Turkey receives an overall rating ofEmerging (2.4) for the Service Delivery Dimension (seeFigure 15). This score is the average of the ratings for eunderlying Policy Goals: (i) enabling diversity andexcellence in training provision (2.2); (ii) fosteringrelevance in public training programs (1.8); and (iii)enhancing evidence based accountability for results(2.6). The explanation for these ratings and theirimplications follow below.

Policy Goal 7: EnablingDiversity and Excellence inTraining Provision

Because the demand for skills is impossible to predictwith precision, having a diversity of providers is a featureof strong WfD systems. Among non state providers, thechallenge is to temper the profit motive or otherprogram agendas with appropriate regulation to assure

quality and relevance. Among state providers a keyconcern is their responsiveness to the demand for skillsfrom employers. Striking the right balance betweeninstitutional autonomy and accountability is oneapproach to address this concern. Policy Goal 7 takesthese ideas into account and benchmarks the systemaccording to the extent to which policies andinstitutional arrangements are in place to: (i) encourageand regulate non state provision of training, and (ii)foster excellence in public training provision bycombining incentives and autonomy in the managementof public institutions.

Turkey is rated at the Emerging level (2.2) for Policy Goal7. The ratings for each specific topic under this policygoal vary significantly between 1.0 (for review of policiestowards non state training provision) and 4.0 (for scopeand formality of non state training provision). Theseratings are presented in detail in Annex 2 and Annex 5.

A diversity of non state providers is active in the trainingmarket, despite few government incentives toencourage non state provision. While most of theseproviders are registered and licensed, few measures arein place for quality assurance. With regard to publictraining provision, the government grants limitedautonomy to the institutions. There are, however, nofinancial/non financial incentives for performance.

Non state provision of training is regulated by thegovernment. A diversity of non state providers offertraining and all of them have to be registered andlicensed in line with Law no: 5508. All private and publictraining providers are generally subject to the same rulesand regulations. However, private training providers (i)

Figure 15: SABER WfD Ratings of the Service DeliveryDimension

Note: see figure 2 for an explanation of the scale on the horizontal axis.

Source: based on analysis of the data collected using the SABER WfDquestionnaire.

Figure 14: ISKUR’s Active Labor Market Programs



have to renew their registration and license regularly; (ii)are expected to report to WfD authorities regularly; and(iii) are subject to regular audits. Private trainingproviders failing in these audits may be placed underobservation/probation or their licenses to operate maybe suspended. With regard to the scope of non statetraining provision, non profit, for profit, domestic andforeign providers are allowed to offer training. While thiscreates a highly diverse mix of providers, it has notresulted in the creation of an overarching association ofprivate training providers.

The government provides a range of financial andnonfinancial incentives to encourage private trainingprovision. However, these incentives form part of awider incentive scheme, and are not solely directed toeducation. The government has recently launched avoucher scheme for private IVET providers established inorganized industrial zones. These institutions are eligibleto enroll students who are receiving tuition subsidiesfrom the government. However, the scope of thisscheme is currently very limited. MoNE offers some nonfinancial incentives for private training providers: (i) itconducts the registration, licensing and inspection ofthese institutions and informs them regularly of anyrelevant legal developments; and (ii) it recognizescertificates and diplomas issued by these institutions.Private training providers are also able to participate innational training/WfD decision making bodies/agenciesby invitation or via associations of private educationinstitutions; and are eligible to compete for governmentfunded training contracts.

Limited measures are in place to assure the quality ofprivate training provision. There is no systematic processfor reviewing the policies on private training provision.Despite recent attempts, such as the Internal AuditReport of the Management Process of Vocational andTechnical Education, it is not possible to state that suchinitiatives have had any impact on current policies.

Mechanisms to incentivize good performance of publictraining institutions are almost non existent. However,MoNE declares its overall target for the desired WfDoutcome, (i.e. enrollment rate in VET institutions) in itsannual performance programs in line with its strategicplan. Thus,MoNE does not employmultiple performanceindicators regarding WfD.

Public training institutions operating under MoNE havelimited autonomy in decision making. They report their

material, equipment and other needs to the centralauthorities for annual budget preparation and areallowed to purchase training materials and other inputs.These institutions are also permitted to generate incomethrough revolving funds. However, as of the 2011 2012school year, only 585 out of 5,456 VET high schools havea functional revolving fund and less than 2 percent ofstudents in public VET high schools participate in theactivities of revolving funds. Additionally, these schoolsdo not have any say on the introduction and closure ofprograms, admission processes, or staff recruitment,replacement or remuneration. MoNE manages all ofthese functions centrally.

In addition to MoNE affiliated IVET and CVET programs,ISKUR has been implementing vocational trainingcourses for the unemployed. These include vocationaltraining courses for employees, the disabled, convictsand ex convicts, as well as community benefit working(public works) programs, entrepreneurship trainingprograms, on the job training programs, a regionaldevelopment project (called GAP II) in the less developedareas of Southeastern Anatolia (which includesvocational training courses, OJT and entrepreneurshipprograms), and the UMEM Project.

The introduction of new programs follows a relativelycomplex process. Every year, Provincial Employment andVocational Education Boards (PEVEBs) present to ISKURprovincial offices their plans for the training programs tobe implemented in line with the labor market needsanalyses in the coming year and employers’ requests.ISKUR’s General Directorate and provincial officesevaluate these needs, the performance of the programsimplemented in previous years, and the priorities in theiraction plans, and agree on the programs for the comingyear. However, other factors such as availability oftraining providers and financing also determine theintroduction of new programs.

Similarly, assessment of system wide resource utilizationand staffing, consultation with relevant stakeholders,labor market analyses and evaluation of theperformance of each training course by provincialdirectorates inform the decision making processregarding closure of programs.

ISKUR prepares its annual performance programs andtargets in line with its strategic plan. Specific targetsinclude enrollment, graduation, job placement rates andtrainee satisfaction. However, there is no incentive or



reward mechanism for ISKUR to achieve these targets.ISKUR has autonomy regarding the introduction andclosure of programs as well as the procurement ofservices from public and private training institutions.Subcontracting institutions are bound by contractualrequirements.

Policy Goal 8: Fostering Relevance in PublicTraining Programs

Public training institutions need reliable information oncurrent and emerging skills demands in order to keeptheir program offerings relevant to market conditions. Itis therefore desirable for public training institutions toestablish and maintain relationships with employers,industry associations, and research institutions. Suchpartners are a source of both information about skillscompetencies and expertise and advice on curriculumdesign and technical specifications for training facilitiesand equipment. They can also help create opportunitiesfor workplace training for students and continuingprofessional development for instructors andadministrators. Policy Goal 8 considers the extent towhich arrangements are in place for public trainingproviders to: (i) benefit from industry and expert input inthe design of programs and (ii) recruit administrators andinstructors with relevant qualifications and support theirprofessional development.

Turkey is evaluated at the Emerging level (1.8) ofdevelopment for Policy Goal 8. The ratings for eachspecific topic under this policy goal vary between 1.0 and2.75. These ratings are presented in detail in Annex 2 andAnnex 5.

Informal and sporadic links exist between public traininginstitutions and industry, with limited involvement ofindustry in curriculum design and the specification ofstandards for training facilities. Links between publictraining providers and research institutions are rare. Thelow score also reflects the fact that previous industryexperience is not a criterion for the recruitment ofinstructors and administrators of public traininginstitutions. Furthermore, despite formal provision ofopportunities for professional development, instructorsoften face practical difficulties in accessing suchopportunities.

Formal links between training institutions and industryare primarily embodied in VQA, which comprisesrepresentatives of ministries, public institutions,agencies, employers and workers. VQA takes decisions

on the issues of implementation of vocational andtechnical education programs at all formal, non formaland apprenticeship education institutions. VQA decisionsare reported to MoNE.

Industry provides inputs on an informal basis into thedesign of program curricula for publicly fundedprograms. Links between industry and IVET and CVETinstitutions operating under MoNE are not extensive,and predominantly take the form of industry internshipsor training courses. However, there are also rare cases ofindustry participation in governance or advisory bodies,industry training for instructors, donation of industryequipment and/or supplies, provision of scholarships fortrainees, and industry participation in the design ofcurricula and assessment of trainees. Still, it is notpossible to state that industry experts have anyinfluential role in determining the standards of publicIVET and CVET programs. Links between these traininginstitutions and research institutions are non existent.

The recruitment of the directors and instructors of theseinstitutions is defined by explicit standards with legalregulations; however, these standards are onlymarginally different from those that regulaterecruitment for general education institutions. Thestandards do not contain any requirements regardingprofessional experience in industry. Furthermore,participation in in service training or professionaldevelopment activities for directors as well as instructorsof IVET institutions is only mandatory as an annual inservice training activity at the end of each school year.Directors and instructors are free to join other in servicetraining courses and professional development activitiesorganized by MoNE or other stakeholders, but these arevoluntary and participation is not encouraged.

The state of post secondary colleges operating underCoHE is no different from IVET and CVET institutions interms of the links with industry, in service training andprofessional development, and requirements regardingrecruitment. It may be claimed that formal links exist viaVQA, but these links are available only for some of theinstitutions and mostly in the form of industryinternships or training courses. There are explicitstandards regulating recruitment, but these standardsdo not contain a requirement regarding professionalindustry experience and in service training.

Regarding ALMP activities conducted by ISKUR, thePEVEBs in all 81 provinces constitute the formal link



between training institutions and industry. PEVEBs’primary aim is tomobilize local facilities and resources byproviding collaboration and peer learning betweendifferent institutions and organizations. PEVEBs offerimportant mechanisms and have the potential toproduce “local solutions for local problems” throughsocial dialogue. Thus, most of the training institutionshave formal links with industry. These links are mostprevalent in regard to governance and advisory issues,assessment of labor market needs, and collaboration onindustry commissioned projects. Moreover, industryexperts contribute informally to the design of curriculafor training programs in some institutions, but they donot have any influence on facility standards. Institutionsaccredited by MoNE examine the facilities where thetraining programswill be held and evaluatewhether theyhave adequate standards.

Policy Goal 9: Enhancing Evidence BasedAccountability for Results

Systematic monitoring and evaluation of service deliveryare important for both quality assurance and systemimprovement. Accomplishing this function requiresgathering and analyzing data from a variety of sources.The reporting of institution level data enables therelevant authorities to ensure that providers aredelivering on expected outcomes. Such data also enablethese authorities to identify gaps or challenges in trainingprovision or areas of good practice. Additionally, periodicsurveys and evaluations of major programs generatecomplementary information that can help enhance therelevance and efficiency of the system as a whole. PolicyGoal 9 considers these ideas when assessing the system’sarrangements for collecting and using data to focusattention on training outcomes, efficiency andinnovation in service delivery.

Turkey is at the Emerging level (2.6) for Policy Goal 9. Theratings for each specific topic under this policy goal varybetween 2.25 and 2.75. These ratings are presented indetail in Annex 2 and Annex 5

All training providers, state and non state, are requiredto collect and report basic administrative data that areoccasionally used to assess institutional performance aswell as analyze system level trends and issues. However,sources of data on labor market outcomes are limited toa few ad hoc skills related surveys or evaluations ofspecifically targeted programs. Public access to data islimited.

Public and private training providers operating underMoNE report specific data, and MoNE publishes annualactivity reports and statistical yearbooks includingadministrative data and graduation statistics. While thelatest school year for which system wide IVET data areavailable is 2012 2013, for CVET institutions operatingunder MoNE, the latest school year for which such dataare available is 2010 2011.

MoNE occasionally conducts surveys regarding IVETactivities. For example, it has conducted evaluations ofoccupational courses in VET programs and of EU fundedprograms for the development of VET centers. However,these studies cannot be considered impact evaluationanalyses.

MoNE has also been operating an e graduate project tomonitor the employment performance of VET graduatesfrom public vocational and technical secondaryeducation institutions from 2001 onwards through atracer study supported by an electronic platform for theregistration of graduates and employers. As of 2012 thesystem has reached 65,000 VET graduates and 6,600employers willing to recruit VET graduates throughtargeted questionnaires and individual registration onthe website database. Graduates are asked about theirlabor market experiences and employers about thetraining quality of graduates, so that the vocationalschools can adjust better to employer expectations. Theresults achieved by the project are promising, though stilllimited, and the outreach of this program can beexpanded to the whole target group. The results of the2009 tracer study show that 33% of graduates wereemployed at the time of the survey, and 53% of theemployed graduates found their jobs through socialnetworks, while only 1.2% used ISKUR services.Information gathered through this program is publiclyavailable but, as data entry is voluntary, the system doesnot include information about all graduates.

The data reported by public and private trainingproviders, as well as those obtained via surveys, are usedto provide feedback to institutions, identify goodpractices and innovations, and inform the design ofpolicies for system level improvements in servicedelivery. However, such data are rarely used to improveprogram and system performance for IVET and life longlearning operations. Public and private training providersoperating under ISKUR are also required to reportspecific data. ISKUR publishes annual activity reports andstatistical yearbooks including administrative data,



graduation statistics, job placements and clientfeedback. Additionally, ISKUR publishes very detailedmonthly statistics on employment including informationon ALMP programs. These data are provided ncoordination with the Social Security Institution and theyinclude only formal employment figures. The datacollected from training providers are evaluated by ISKUR,and used as an input to the strategic planning process.Annual performance evaluation reports are prepared forthe strategic objectives, planned activities, and spending.ISKUR also conducts occasional surveys, most notably forUMEM, implements projects and an impact evaluationstudies for its VET courses (i.e. the study conductedtogether with the World Bank). Data collected viasurveys and impact evaluations also contribute to theallocation of budget appropriations. Regarding the use ofdata to monitor and improve program and systemperformance, ISKUR has been implementing an EUfunded project (Strengthening of Public EmploymentServices) to improve its data collection capacity andcapability. An institutional performance evaluation willbe held in accordance with the M&E system under thisproject.

Implications of the FindingsGranting autonomy to public institutions is one approachtaken by various countries to improve the performanceof public institutions (i.e. Singapore Institute of TechnicalEducation, which was constituted as a statutory boardunder the Ministry of Education). The Turkish authoritiesshould consider the possibility and benefits of combiningincentives and autonomy in the management of publictraining institutions. MoNE successfully implemented aschool grants program under the Secondary Schoolsproject, where school administrations were given fullautonomy to use allocated resources for theprocurement of goods and services (excluding staffing).

Integrating industry and expert input into the design anddelivery of public training programs would be animportant step in the Turkish WfD system (especially inTVET). In Turkey, formal links exist between almost alltraining institutions, and industry is willing to collaboratewith the related government agencies, but publictraining institutions’ links with industry partners, as well

18 The METEK Project, launched in 2012 by MoNE’s VET General Directorate,aims to improve the quality of VET through several mechanisms: a selfevaluation guideline, which has been implemented in 60 pilot schools at thesecondary and post secondary levels; a quality development strategy andaction plan, which was accompanied by a quality management standards

as training and research institutions, remain informal,and do not always lead to joint decision making. MoNEunderlines the need for the active participation of allWfD stakeholders in decision making processes and thedefinition of education and training outputs togetherwith related industry representatives (MoNE, 2013).Once full realization of such plans is achieved, Turkey willhave an advanced level of development for servicedelivery.

In TVET, MoNE has efficient systems for evaluating itsperformance. For example, Turkey has developedcompetency based and modular VET curricula, withimprovements in the quality of the vocational technicalsecondary education curricula being evaluated throughan Assessment of the Beneficiaries of the CurriculumReform of the Secondary Education Project, undertakenin 2012. The revised curricula were generally judgedappropriate with respect to teaching, learning process,and measurement and evaluation dimensions, but aclearly defined philosophy and learning theoryunderlying the curricula reform was found to be lacking.

Turkey has adequate tools and data for evidence basedpolicy making in TVET, which is another sign of adeveloped service delivery function. Related agencieskeep administrative data, conduct timely research, andbuild efficient collaboration with research institutionsand think tanks. However, the sharing and utilization ofdata at all stages of policy making, implementation andmonitoring are still not at desired levels. The importanceof expanding the use of policy relevant data for focusingproviders' attention on training outcomes, efficiency andinnovation is being underlined by policy makers, and thisis reflected in strategic plans.

All WfD stakeholders should be vocal and continueexpressing the need to establish strong mechanisms fordata sharing and improve cooperation. In order tomonitor overall performance of the WfD system as wellas the individual agencies, the structure of governmentagencies should be more transparent. As researchinstitutions and think tanks are at the forefront ofdeveloping, adapting, and introducing new products andservices, Turkey may benefit from their activities to gainuseful insights into the future demand for skills.18

guideline; a pilot reaching out campaign about quality standards in 21provinces; and the establishment of a Quality Development Department underMoNE’s VET General Directorate.



Annex 1: Acronyms

ALMPs Active Labor Market ProgramsBVE Board of Vocational EducationCoHE Council of Higher EducationCVET Continuing Vocational Education and TrainingDCI Data Collection InstrumentEQF European Qualification FrameworkEU European UnionGDP Gross Domestic ProductIKMEP Improving Human Resources through VETISKUR Turkish Employment AgencyIVET Initial Vocational Education and TrainingLLL Life Long LearningMoD Ministry of DevelopmentMoLSS Ministry of Labor and Social SecurityMoNE Ministry of National EducationMVET Modernization of Vocational Education and TrainingNGO Non Governmental OrganizationNQF National Qualifications FrameworkOECD Organization for Economic Co operation and DevelopmentPVEB Provincial Vocational Education BoardsPEVEB Provincial Employment and Vocational Education BoardsPIAAC Program for the International Assessment of Adult CompetenciesPISA Program for International Student AssessmentSABER Systems Assessment for Better Education ResultsSME Small and Medium EnterprisesSTEP Skills toward Employment and ProductivitySVET Strengthening the Vocational Education and Training SystemTEPAV Economic Policy Research Foundation of TurkeyTOBB Union of Chambers and Commodity ExchangesTVET Technical Vocational Education and TrainingUIF Unemployment Insurance FundUMEM Specialized Occupational Development CentersVET Vocational Education and TrainingVQA Vocational Qualifications AuthorityWfD Workforce Development



Annex 2: The SABER WfD Analytical Framework

Policy Goal Policy Action Topic

Dimen

sion

1StrategicFram

ework G1 Setting a Strategic

DirectionProvide sustained advocacy for WfD at the topleadership level

G1_T1 Advocacy for WfD to Support Economic DevelopmentG1_T2 Strategic Focus and Decisions by the WfD Champions

G2Fostering aDemand LedApproach

Establish clarity on the demand for skills and areas ofcritical constraint

G2_T1 Overall Assessment of Economic Prospects and SkillsImplications

G2_T2 Critical Skills Constraints in Priority Economic Sectors

Engage employers in setting WfD priorities and inenhancing skills upgrading for workers

G2_T3 Role of Employers and IndustryG2_T4 Skills Upgrading Incentives for EmployersG2_T5 Monitoring of the Incentive Programs

G3Strengthening

CriticalCoordination

Formalize key WfD roles for coordinated action onstrategic priorities

G3_T1 Roles of Government Ministries and AgenciesG3_T2 Roles of Non Government WfD Stakeholders

G3_T3 Coordination for the Implementation of Strategic WfDMeasures

Dimen

sion

2System

Oversight

G4Ensuring Efficiency

and Equity inFunding

Provide stable funding for effective programs in initial,continuing and targeted vocational education andtraining

G4_T1 Overview of Funding for WfD

G4_T2 Recurrent Funding for Initial Vocational Education andTraining (IVET)

G4_T3 Recurrent Funding for Continuing Vocational Education andTraining Programs (CVET)

G4_T4 Recurrent Funding for Training related Active LaborMarket Programs (ALMPs)

Monitor and enhance equity in funding for training G4_T5 Equity in Funding for Training ProgramsFacilitate sustained partnerships between traininginstitutions and employers G4_T6 Partnerships between Training Providers and Employers

G5Assuring Relevant

and ReliableStandards

Broaden the scope of competency standards as a basisfor developing qualifications frameworks

G5_T1 Competency Standards and National QualificationsFrameworks

G5_T2 Competency Standards for Major Occupations

Establish protocols for assuring the credibility of skillstesting and certification

G5_T3 Occupational Skills TestingG5_T4 Skills Testing and CertificationG5_T5 Skills Testing for Major Occupations

Develop and enforce accreditation standards formaintaining the quality of training provision

G5_T6 Government Oversight of AccreditationG5_T7 Establishment of Accreditation Standards

G5_T8 Accreditation Requirements and Enforcement ofAccreditation Standards

G5_T9 Incentives and Support for Accreditation

G6Diversifying

Pathways for SkillsAcquisition

Promote educational progression and permeabilitythrough multiple pathways, including for TVET students

G6_T1 Learning PathwaysG6_T2 Public Perception of Pathways for TVET

Facilitate life long learning through articulation of skillscertification and recognition of prior learning

G6_T3 Articulation of Skills CertificationG6_T4 Recognition of Prior Learning

Provide support services for skills acquisition byworkers, job seekers and the disadvantaged

G6_T5 Support for Further Occupational and Career DevelopmentG6_T6 Training related Provision of Services for the Disadvantaged

Dimen

sion

3ServiceDe

livery

G7Enabling Diversityand Excellence inTraining Provision

Encourage and regulate non state provision of training

G7_T1 Scope and Formality of Non State Training ProvisionG7_T2 Incentives for Non State ProvidersG7_T3 Quality Assurance of Non State Training ProvisionG7_T4 Review of Policies towards Non State Training Provision

Combine incentives and autonomy in the managementof public training institutions

G7_T5 Targets and Incentives for Public Training InstitutionsG7_T6 Autonomy and Accountability of Public Training InstitutionsG7_T7 Introduction and Closure of Public Training Programs

G8Fostering Relevancein Public Training

Programs

Integrate industry and expert input into the design anddelivery of public training programs

G8_T1 Links between Training Institutions and IndustryG8_T2 Industry Role in the Design of Program CurriculaG8_T3 Industry Role in the Specification of Facility StandardsG8_T4 Links between Training and Research Institutions

Recruit and support administrators and instructors forenhancing the market relevance of public trainingprograms

G8_T5 Recruitment and In Service Training of Heads of PublicTraining Institutions

G8_T6 Recruitment and In Service Training of Instructors of PublicTraining Institutions

G9

EnhancingEvidence basedAccountability for

Results

Expand the availability and use of policy relevant datafor focusing providers' attention on training outcomes,efficiency and innovation

G9_T1 Administrative Data from Training ProvidersG9_T2 Survey and Other Data

G9_T3 Use of Data to Monitor and Improve Program and SystemPerformance

TURK

EYWORK

FORC

EDE

VELO

PMEN

TSA

BERCO

UNTR

YRE

PORT

|201

2

SYSTEM

SAP

PROAC

HFO

RBE

TTER

EDUCA

TIONRE

SULTS

36

Anne

x3:

Rubricsfor

ScoringtheSA

BERWfD

Data

Functio

nalD

imen

sion

1:StrategicFram

ework

Policy

Goal

LevelofD

evelop

men

t

Latent

Emerging

Establishe

dAd

vanced

G1:SettingaStrategicDirection

forWfD

Visib

lecham

pion

sforW

fDareeither

absent

ortake

nospecific

actio

nto

advance

strategic

WfD

priorities.

Some

visib

lecham

pion

sprovide

adho

cadvocacy

for

WfD

andhave

actedon

few

interven

tions

toadvance

strategic

WfD

priorities;

noarrangem

entsexist

tomon

itor

and

review

implem

entatio

nprogress.

Governmen

tlead

ers

exercise

sustaine

dad

vocacy

forWfD

with

occasion

al,ad

hocparticipation

from

nongo

vernmen

tlead

ers;

their

advocacy

focuses

onselected

indu

strie

sor

econ

omic

sectors

and

manife

sts

itself

through

arange

ofspecific

interven

tions;

implem

entatio

nprogress

ismon

itored,

albe

itthroughad

hocreviews.

Both

governmen

tan

dno

ngovernmen

tlead

ers

exercise

sustaine

dadvocacy

forWfD, a

ndrely

onroutine,

institu

tiona

lized

processesto

collabo

rate

onwell

integrated

interven

tions

toadvance

astrategic,

econ

omy

wide

WfD

policy

agen

da;

implem

entatio

nprogress

ismon

itoredandreview

edthrough

routine,

institu

tiona

lized

processes.

TURK

EYWORK

FORC

EDE

VELO

PMEN

TSA

BERCO

UNTR

YRE

PORT

|201

2

SYSTEM

SAP

PROAC

HFO

RBE

TTER

EDUCA

TIONRE

SULTS

37

Functio

nalD

imen

sion

1:StrategicFram

ework

Policy

Goal

LevelofD

evelop

men

t

Latent

Emerging

Establishe

dAd

vanced

G2:FosteringaDemandLed

ApproachtoWfD

Thereis

noassessmen

tof

the

coun

try's

econ

omic

prospe

cts

and

their

implications

for

skills;

indu

stryandem

ployersh

ave

alim

ited

orno

role

inde

fining

strategic

WfD

prioritiesa

ndreceivelim

ited

supp

ort

from

the

governmen

tfor

skills

upgrading.

Some

adho

cassessmen

tsexist

onthe

coun

try's

econ

omic

prospe

cts

and

theirim

plications

forskills;

somemeasuresaretakento

address

critical

skills

constraints(e.g.,

incentives

for

skills

upgrading

byem

ployers);the

governmen

tmakes

limite

defforts

toen

gage

employers

asstrategicpartne

rsinWfD.

Routineassessmen

tsbased

onmultip

leda

tasources

exist

onthe

coun

try's

econ

omic

prospe

cts

and

theirimplications

forskills;a

widerangeof

measuresw

ithbroa

dcoverage

aretakento

address

critical

skills

constraints;thegovernmen

trecognize

sem

ployers

asstrategic

partne

rsin

WfD,

form

alizes

their

role,and

provides

supp

ortforskills

upgradingthroughincentive

sche

mes

that

arereview

edan

dad

justed

.

Arich

array

ofroutine

and

robu

stassessmen

tsby

multip

lestakeh

olde

rsexists

onthe

coun

try'secon

omic

prospe

cts

andtheirimplications

forskills;

theinform

ationprovides

abasis

forawiderangeof

measures

with

broa

dcoverage

that

address

critical

skills

constraints;

the

governmen

trecognize

sem

ployers

asstrategic

partne

rsin

WfD,

form

alizes

their

role,

and

provides

supp

ort

for

skills

upgrading

through

incentives,

includ

ingsomeform

ofalevy

gran

tsche

me,

that

are

system

atically

review

edfor

impact

and

adjusted

accordingly.

TURK

EYWORK

FORC

EDE

VELO

PMEN

TSA

BERCO

UNTR

YRE

PORT

|201

2

SYSTEM

SAP

PROAC

HFO

RBE

TTER

EDUCA

TIONRE

SULTS

38

Functio

nalD

imen

sion

1:StrategicFram

ework

PolicyGo

alLevelofD

evelop

men

t

Latent

Emerging

Establishe

dAd

vanced

G3:StrengtheningCriticalCoordinationforImplementation

Indu

stry/employers

have

alim

itedor

noroleinde

fining

strategicWfD

priorities;

the

governmen

teither

provides

noincentives

toen

courage

skills

upgrading

byem

ployersor

cond

ucts

noreview

sof

such

incentive

programs.

Indu

stry/employers

help

defin

eWfD

prioritieson

anad

hocbasis

andmakelim

itedcontrib

utions

toaddressskills

implications

ofmajor

policy/investmen

tde

cisio

ns;the

governmen

tprovides

some

incentives

forskillsup

gradingfor

form

aland

inform

alsector

employers;ifalevy

grantsche

me

exists

itscoverage

islim

ited;

incentive

programs

are

not

system

atically

review

edfor

impact.

Indu

stry/employershe

lpde

fine

WfD

priorities

ona

routine

basis

and

make

some

contrib

utions

inselected

areas

toaddressthe

skillsimplications

ofmajor

policy/investmen

tde

cisio

ns;

the

governmen

tprovides

arangeof

incentives

for

skills

upgrading

for

all

employers;alevy

grantschem

ewith

broa

dcoverage

ofform

alsector

employers

exists;

incentive

programs

are

system

atically

review

edand

adjusted

;an

annu

alrepo

rton

the

levy

grant

sche

me

ispu

blish

edwith

atim

elag.

Indu

stry/employers

help

defin

eWfD

prioritieson

aroutinebasis

andmakesign

ificant

contrib

utions

inmultip

leareasto

addressthe

skills

implications

ofmajor

policy/investmen

tde

cisio

ns;the

governmen

tprovides

arangeof

incentives

forskillsup

gradingfor

allemployers;alevy

grantschem

ewith

compreh

ensive

coverage

ofform

alsector

employers

exists;

incentiveprogramsto

encourage

skillsup

gradingaresystem

atically

review

edforim

pact

onskillsan

dprod

uctiv

ityand

are

adjusted

accordingly;

anannu

alrepo

rton

thelevy

grantschem

eispu

blish

edinatim

elyfashion.

TURK

EYWORK

FORC

EDE

VELO

PMEN

TSA

BERCO

UNTR

YRE

PORT

|201

2

SYSTEM

SAP

PROAC

HFO

RBE

TTER

EDUCA

TIONRE

SULTS

39

Functio

nalD

imen

sion

2:System

Oversight

Policy

Goal

LevelofD

evelop

men

t

Latent

Emerging

Establishe

dA

dvan

ced

G4:EnsuringEfficiencyandEquityinFunding

The

governmen

tfund

sIVET,CV

ETand

ALMPs

(but

notOJT

inSM

Es)

based

onad

hoc

budgetingprocesses,bu

ttakes

noactio

nto

facilitate

form

alpartne

rships

betw

een

training

providers

and

employers;theim

pact

offund

ing

onthe

bene

ficiarie

sof

training

programshasno

tbe

enrecentlyreview

ed.

The

governmen

tfund

sIVET,

CVET

(includ

ingOJTinSM

Es)and

ALMPs;fund

ing

for

IVET

and

CVET

followsroutinebu

dgeting

processes

involving

only

governmen

tofficials

with

allocatio

nsde

term

ined

largely

bytheprevious

year's

budg

et;

fund

ingforALMPs

isde

cide

dby

governmen

tofficials

onan

adho

cbasis

and

targets

select

popu

latio

ngrou

psthrough

vario

uschanne

ls;the

governmen

ttakessomeactio

nto

facilitateform

alpartne

rships

betw

een

individu

altraining

providersandem

ployers;recent

review

scon

sidered

theim

pactof

fund

ingon

onlytraining

related

indicators

(e.g.

enrollm

ent,

completion),which

stim

ulated

dialogue

amon

gsome

WfD

stakeh

olde

rs.

Thegovernmen

tfund

sIVET,CV

ET(in

clud

ingOJT

inSM

Es)a

ndALMPs;

fund

ing

forIVET

isroutine

and

basedon

multip

lecrite

ria,including

eviden

ceof

program

effectiven

ess;

recurren

tfun

ding

forC

VETrelieso

nform

alprocesseswith

inpu

tfrom

key

stakeh

olde

rsand

annu

alrepo

rtingwith

alag;

fund

ingfor

ALMPs

isde

term

ined

through

asystem

aticprocesswith

inpu

tfrom

key

stakeh

olde

rs;

ALMPs

target

diversepo

pulatio

ngrou

psthrough

vario

uschanne

lsandarereview

edforim

pact

butfollow

upislim

ited;

the

governmen

ttakesactio

nto

facilitate

form

alpartne

rships

betw

een

training

providers

and

employers

atmultip

lelevels

(institu

tionala

ndsystem

ic);recent

review

sconsidered

theim

pact

offund

ing

onbo

thtraining

related

indicators

and

labo

rmarket

outcom

es;thereview

sstim

ulated

dialogue

amon

gWfD

stakeh

olde

rsandsomerecommen

datio

nswere

implem

ented.

The

governmen

tfund

sIVET,CV

ET(in

clud

ingOJT

inSM

Es)andALMPs;

fund

ingforIVE

Tisroutineandbased

oncompreh

ensive

crite

ria,including

eviden

ceof

program

effectiven

ess,

that

are

routinely

review

edan

dad

justed

;recurrent

fund

ingforC

VET

relieso

nform

alprocessesw

ithinpu

tfrom

key

stakeh

olde

rsand

timely

annu

alrepo

rting;fund

ingforA

LMPs

isde

term

ined

throughasystem

atic

process

with

inpu

tfrom

key

stakeh

olde

rs;ALMPs

target

diverse

popu

latio

ngrou

psthrough

vario

uschanne

lsand

are

review

edfor

impactandad

justed

accordingly;the

governmen

ttakes

actio

nto

facilitate

form

alpartne

rships

betw

een

training

providersandem

ployersat

alllevels(institu

tionaland

system

ic);

recent

review

sconsidered

the

impact

offund

ingon

afullrangeof

training

relatedindicators

andlabo

rmarket

outcom

es;

the

review

sstim

ulated

broa

dba

sed

dialogue

amon

gWfD

stakeh

olde

rsand

key

recommen

datio

nswere

implem

ented.

TURK

EYWORK

FORC

EDE

VELO

PMEN

TSA

BERCO

UNTR

YRE

PORT

|201

2

SYSTEM

SAP

PROAC

HFO

RBE

TTER

EDUCA

TIONRE

SULTS

40

Functio

nalD

imen

sion

2:System

Oversight

Policy

Goal

LevelofD

evelop

men

t

Latent

Emerging

Establishe

dA

dvan

ced

G5:AssuringRelevantandReliableStandards

Policy

dialogue

oncompe

tency

standardsa

nd/orthe

NQFo

ccurso

nan

adho

cbasis

with

limite

den

gagemen

tof

keystakeh

olde

rs;

compe

tency

standardshave

not

been

defin

ed;skills

testing

for

major

occupatio

nsis

mainlytheo

ryba

sed

and

certificates

awarde

dare

recognize

dby

public

sector

employers

only

andhave

little

impact

onem

ploymen

tand

earnings;no

system

isin

place

toestablish

accred

itatio

nstandards.

Afew

stakeh

olde

rsen

gage

inad

hoc

policy

dialogue

oncompe

tencystandardsand/or

the

NQF;

compe

tency

standards

exist

for

afew

occupatio

nsandareused

bysome

training

providers

intheirp

rogram

s;skillstestingis

compe

tencybased

forafew

occupatio

nsbu

tforthemost

part

ismainlytheo

ryba

sed;

certificatesarerecognize

dby

public

and

some

private

sector

employers

but

have

little

impa

cton

employmen

tandearnings;the

accred

itatio

nof

training

providers

issupe

rvise

dby

ade

dicated

officein

therelevant

ministry;

privateprovidersarerequ

ired

tobe

accred

ited,

however

accred

itatio

nstandards

are

notconsistently

publicized

oren

forced

;providers

are

offered

some

incentives

toseek

andretainaccred

itatio

n.

Num

erou

sstakeh

olde

rsen

gage

inpo

licy

dialogue

oncompe

tency

standards

and/or

the

NQF

through

institu

tiona

lized

processes;compe

tency

standardse

xistform

osto

ccup

ations

and

areused

bysometraining

providersin

theirprograms;

the

NQF,

ifin

place,

coverssomeoccupatio

nsandarangeof

skill

levels;

skills

testing

for

most

occupatio

nsfollows

standard

proced

ures,is

compe

tencybased

and

assesses

both

theo

retical

know

ledge

and

practic

alskills;

certificates

are

recognize

dby

both

public

andprivate

sector

employers

and

may

impa

ctem

ploymen

tand

earnings;

the

accred

itatio

nof

training

providers

issupe

rvise

dby

ade

dicatedagen

cyin

the

relevant

ministry;

the

agen

cyis

respon

sible

for

defin

ing

accred

itatio

nstandards

with

stakeh

olde

rinpu

t;standardsare

review

edon

anad

hoc

basis

andarepu

blicize

dor

enforced

tosome

extent;

allproviders

receiving

public

fund

ing

must

beaccred

ited;

providers

are

offered

incentives

and

limite

dsupp

ort

toseek

and

retain

accred

itatio

n.

Allkey

stakeh

olde

rsen

gage

inpo

licy

dialogue

oncompe

tencys

tand

ards

and/or

the

NQF

through

institu

tiona

lized

processes;compe

tencys

tand

ards

exist

for

mosto

ccup

ations

andareused

bytraining

providersintheirp

rogram

s;theNQF,ifin

place,

covers

mostoccupatio

nsand

awiderangeof

skilllevels;

skillstestingfor

most

occupatio

nsfollows

standard

proced

ures,

iscompe

tencybased

and

assesses

both

theo

reticalkn

owledgean

dpractic

alskills;

robu

stprotocols,

includ

ing

rand

omau

dits,

ensure

the

cred

ibility

ofcertificatio

n;certificatesare

valued

bymost

employ

ers

and

consistently

improve

employmen

tprospe

ctsandearnings;the

accred

itatio

nof

training

providersis

supe

rvise

dby

ade

dicatedagen

cyintherelevant

ministry;

the

agen

cyis

respon

sible

forde

fining

accred

itatio

nstandardsin

consultatio

nwith

stakeh

olde

rs;

standards

are

review

edfollowingestablishe

dprotocols

and

are

publicize

dand

routinely

enforced

;all

training

providers

are

requ

iredas

wellaso

fferedincentives

and

supp

orttoseek

andretainaccred

itatio

n.

TURK

EYWORK

FORC

EDE

VELO

PMEN

TSA

BERCO

UNTR

YRE

PORT

|201

2

SYSTEM

SAP

PROAC

HFO

RBE

TTER

EDUCA

TIONRE

SULTS

41

Functio

nalD

imen

sion

2:System

Oversight

Policy

Goal

LevelofD

evelop

men

t

Latent

Emerging

Establishe

dAd

vanced

G6:DiversifyingPathwaysforSkillsAcquisition

Stud

ents

intechnicaland

vocatio

naleducation

have

few

orno

optio

nsfor

furthe

rform

alskills

acqu

isitio

nbe

yond

the

second

ary

level

and

the

governmen

ttakes

noactio

nto

improve

public

percep

tion

ofTV

ET;

certificatesfor

technicaland

vocatio

nalprogram

sare

not

recognized

inthe

NQF;

qualificatio

nscertified

byno

nEducation

ministrie

sare

not

recognize

dby

form

alprogramsun

derthe

Ministry

ofEducation;

recognition

ofpriorlearning

receives

limite

dattention;

the

governmen

tprovides

practically

nosupp

ortfor

furthe

roccupatio

nal

and

career

developm

ent,

ortraining

programs

for

disadvantagedpo

pulatio

ns.

Stud

ents

intechnical

and

vocatio

naleducation

can

only

progress

tovocatio

nally

oriented

,no

nun

iversity

programs;thegovernmen

ttakes

limite

dactio

nto

improvepu

blic

percep

tion

ofTV

ET(e.g.

diversifyinglearning

pathways);

some

certificatesfortechnical

and

vocatio

nal

programs

are

recognize

din

the

NQF;

few

qualificatio

nscertified

byno

nEducation

ministrie

sare

recognize

dby

form

alprograms

unde

rthe

Ministry

ofEducation;

policym

akers

pay

some

attentionto

therecognition

ofpriorlearning

and

providethe

publicwith

someinform

ationon

the

subject;

the

governmen

tofferslim

itedservices

forfurther

occupatio

nal

and

career

developm

ent

through

stan

dalon

elocalservice

centersthat

areno

tintegratedinto

asystem

;training

programs

for

disadvantaged

popu

latio

nsreceivead

hocs

uppo

rt.

Stud

ents

intechnical

and

vocatio

nal

educationcanprogress

tovocatio

nally

oriented

programs,

includ

ing

atthe

university

level;

thegovernmen

ttakes

someactio

nto

improvepu

blicpe

rcep

tion

ofTV

ET(e.g.

diversifying

learning

pathwaysa

ndim

provingprogramqu

ality

)andreview

sthe

impactof

such

effortso

nan

adho

cbasis;mostcertificatesfor

technicaland

vocatio

nalprogramsare

recognize

dintheNQF;alargenu

mbe

rof

qualificatio

nscertified

byno

nEducation

ministrie

sare

recognize

dby

form

alprograms

unde

rthe

Ministry

ofEducation,

albe

itwith

outthe

gran

tingof

cred

its;policym

akersg

ivesomeattention

totherecognition

ofpriorlearning

and

providethepu

blicwith

someinform

ation

onthesubject;

aform

alassociationof

stakeh

olde

rsprovides

dedicated

attention

toadultlearning

issue

s;the

governmen

toffers

limite

dservices

for

furthe

roccupatio

nal

and

career

developm

ent,

which

are

available

through

anintegrated

netw

ork

ofcenters;

training

programs

for

disadvantaged

popu

latio

nsreceive

system

aticsupp

ortandarereview

edfor

impacton

anad

hocbasis.

Stud

entsintechnicaland

vocatio

naledu

catio

ncanprogress

toacad

emicallyor

vocatio

nally

oriented

programs,includ

inga

tthe

university

level;thegovernmen

ttakescohe

rent

actio

non

multip

lefron

tsto

improve

public

percep

tionof

TVET

(e.g.d

iversifying

learning

pathwaysandim

provingprogram

quality

and

relevance,

with

the

supp

ort

ofa

med

iacampaign)

androutinelyreview

sandad

justs

such

effortsto

maxim

izetheirim

pact;most

certificates

for

technical

and

vocatio

nal

programsarerecognize

din

theNQF;

alarge

numbe

rof

qualificatio

nscertified

byno

nEducation

ministrie

sare

recognize

dand

gran

tedcred

itsby

form

alprogramsu

nder

the

Ministry

ofEducation;

policym

akers

give

sustaine

dattentionto

therecognition

ofprior

learning

and

provide

the

public

with

compreh

ensive

inform

ationon

thesubject;a

natio

nal

organizatio

nof

stakeh

olde

rsprovides

dedicatedattentionto

adultlearning

issue

s;the

governmen

toffers

acompreh

ensive

men

uof

services

forfurthe

roccupatio

nal

and

career

developm

ent,

includ

ing

onlin

eresources,

which

are

availablethroughan

integrated

netw

orkof

centers;training

programsfordisadvantaged

popu

latio

nsreceivesystem

atic

supp

ortwith

multiyear

budgets

and

are

routinely

review

edforimpactandad

justed

accordingly.

TURK

EYWORK

FORC

EDE

VELO

PMEN

TSA

BERCO

UNTR

YRE

PORT

|201

2

SYSTEM

SAP

PROAC

HFO

RBE

TTER

EDUCA

TIONRE

SULTS

42

Functio

nalD

imen

sion

3:ServiceDe

livery

Policy

Goal

LevelofD

evelop

men

t

Latent

Emerging

Establishe

dAd

vanced

G7:EnablingDiversityandExcellenceinTrainingProvision

There

isno

diversity

oftraining

provision

asthe

system

islargely

comprise

dof

public

providerswith

limite

dor

noau

tono

my;

training

provision

isno

tinform

edby

form

alassessmen

t,stakeh

olde

rinpu

tor

performance

targets.

Thereissomediversity

intraining

provision

;no

nstate

providers

operatewith

limite

dgovernmen

tincentives

and

governan

ceover

registratio

n,licen

singandqu

ality

assurance;

public

training

isprovided

byinstitu

tions

with

someautono

myandinform

edby

some

assessmen

tof

implem

entatio

nconstraints,

stakeh

olde

rinpu

tand

basic

targets.

There

isdiversity

intraining

provision

;no

nstate

training

providers,

some

registered

and

licen

sed,

operatewith

inarange

ofgovernmen

tincentives,

system

atic

quality

assurance

measuresandroutinereview

sof

governmen

tpo

liciestowardno

nstate

training

providers;

public

providers,

mostly

governed

bymanagem

entbo

ards,have

some

autono

my;

training

provision

isinform

edby

form

alan

alysis

ofim

plem

entatio

nconstraints,

stakeh

olde

rinpu

tand

basic

targets;laggingprovidersreceive

supp

ort

and

exem

plary

institu

tions

arerewarde

d.

There

isbroa

ddiversity

intraining

provision

;no

nstate

training

providers,

mostregistered

and

licen

sed,

operate

with

compreh

ensive

governmen

tincentives,s

ystematic

quality

assurance

measures

and

routine

review

and

adjustmen

tof

governmen

tpo

licies

toward

nonstate

training

providers;

public

providers,

mostly

governed

bymanagem

ent

boards,have

significant

autono

my;

decisio

nsabou

ttraining

provision

aretim

ebo

undandinform

edby

form

alassessmen

tofimplem

entatio

nconstraints;stakeh

olde

rinp

utanduseof

avarie

tyof

measures

toincentivize

performance

includ

esupp

ort,

rewards

andpe

rformance

basedfund

ing.

TURK

EYWORK

FORC

EDE

VELO

PMEN

TSA

BERCO

UNTR

YRE

PORT

|201

2

SYSTEM

SAP

PROAC

HFO

RBE

TTER

EDUCA

TIONRE

SULTS

43

Functio

nalD

imen

sion

3:ServiceDe

livery

Policy

Goal

LevelofD

evelop

men

t

Latent

Emerging

Establishe

dAd

vanced

G8:FosteringRelevanceinPublicTrainingPrograms

Therearefewor

noattemptsto

foster

relevanceinpu

blictraining

programs

through

encouraging

links

betw

een

training

institu

tions,

indu

stry

and

research

institu

tions

orthrough

setting

standards

for

the

recruitm

ent

and

training

ofhe

adsandinstructorsin

training

institu

tions.

Relevance

ofpu

blic

training

isen

hanced

throughinform

allinks

betw

een

some

training

institu

tions,ind

ustryandresearch

institu

tions,includ

inginpu

tinto

thede

signof

curriculaandfacility

standards;

headsandinstructors

are

recruited

onthe

basis

ofminim

umacad

emic

stan

dards

andhave

limite

dop

portun

ities

for

professio

naldevelop

men

t.

Relevance

ofpu

blic

training

isen

hanced

through

form

allinks

betw

een

some

training

institu

tions,ind

ustryandresearch

institu

tions,

leading

tocollabo

ratio

nin

several

areas

includ

ingbu

tno

tlim

itedto

the

desig

nof

curricula

and

facility

standards;

headsandinstructors

are

recruited

onthe

basis

ofminim

umacad

emic

and

profession

alstan

dardsandhave

regulara

ccesstoop

portun

ities

for

professio

naldevelop

men

t.

Relevance

ofpu

blic

training

isen

hanced

through

form

allinks

betw

een

most

training

institu

tions,ind

ustryandresearch

institu

tions,leading

tosignificant

collabo

ratio

nin

awiderangeof

areas;

headsandinstructorsare

recruited

onthe

basis

ofminim

umacad

emic

and

profession

alstan

dardsandhave

regular

access

todiverse

oppo

rtun

ities

for

professio

nal

developm

ent,

includ

ingindu

stry

attachmen

tsforinstructors.

TURK

EYWORK

FORC

EDE

VELO

PMEN

TSA

BERCO

UNTR

YRE

PORT

|201

2

SYSTEM

SAP

PROAC

HFO

RBE

TTER

EDUCA

TIONRE

SULTS

44

Functio

nalD

imen

sion

3:ServiceDe

livery

Policy

Goal

LevelofD

evelop

men

t

Latent

Emerging

Establishe

dAd

vanced

G9:EnhancingEvidencebasedAccountabilityforResults

There

are

nospecific

data

collection

and

repo

rting

requ

iremen

ts,

but

training

providersmaintain

theirow

nda

taba

ses;

the

governmen

tdo

esno

tcond

uctor

spon

sor

skillsrelatedsurveysor

impact

evaluatio

nsand

rarely

uses

data

tomon

itorandim

prove

system

performance.

Training

providers

collect

and

repo

rtad

ministrative

data

and

there

are

significant

gaps

inrepo

rtingby

nonstateproviders;

some

public

providers

issue

annu

alrepo

rts

and

the

governmen

toccasion

ally

spon

sorsor

cond

uctsskillsrelated

surveys;thegovernmen

tdoe

snot

consolidateda

tainasystem

wide

database

and

uses

mostly

administrative

data

tomon

itor

andim

provesystem

performance;

the

governmen

tpu

blish

esinform

ation

ongraduate

labo

rmarket

outcom

esfor

some

training

programs.

Training

providers

collect

and

repo

rtad

ministrativean

dothe

rdata

(e.g.,

job

placem

ent

statistics,

earnings

ofgraduates)

and

there

are

some

gaps

inrepo

rtingby

nonstateproviders;

most

public

providers

issue

internal

annu

alrepo

rtsand

the

governmen

troutinely

spon

sors

skillsrelated

surveys;

the

governmen

t con

solidates

dataina

system

wideda

taba

seanduses

administrative

data

and

inform

ation

from

surveys

tomon

itor

and

improve

system

performance;

the

governmen

tpu

blish

esinform

ation

ongraduate

labo

rmarketou

tcom

esforn

umerou

strainingprograms.

Training

providers

collect

and

repo

rtad

ministrativean

dothe

rdata

(e.g.,

job

placem

ent

statistics,

earnings

ofgraduates)

and

there

are

few

gaps

inrepo

rtingby

nonstateproviders;

most

public

providers

issue

publicly

availableannu

alrepo

rts

and

the

governmen

troutinely

spon

sorsor

cond

uctsskillsrelated

surveysand

impact

evaluatio

ns;

thegovernmen

tcon

solidates

data

ina

system

wide,

upto

date

databa

seanduses

administrative

data,inform

ation

from

surveys

and

impa

ctevalua

tions

tomon

itor

and

improve

system

performance;

the

governmen

tpu

blish

esinform

ation

ongraduate

labo

rmarketou

tcom

esfor

most

training

programs

onlin

e.



Annex 4: References and Informants

References

EBRD World Bank (2008), Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Survey (BEEPS),.http://data.worldbank.org/data catalog/BEEPS

European Training Foundation (2011), Flexicurity Analysis of the Labour Market in Turkey,http://www.etf.europa.eu/webatt.nsf/0/1A7DEF4E58F42D41C12579440040803B/$file/Flexicurity_Turkey.pdf

Gonand, F., Joumard, I. and Price, R., (2007), ‘Public spending efficiency: Institutional indicators in primary and secondaryeducation’,OECD Economics Department Working Papers No 543, Paris.

Law, S.S., (2008), Vocational Technical Education and Economic Development: The Singapore Experience, in Lee SingKong, Goh Chor Boon, Birger Fredriksen and Tan Jee Peng (eds.). Toward a Better Future. Education and Training forEconomic Development in Singapore since 1965. Washington D.C.: World Bank and International Institute ofEducation, Singapore.

McKinsey&Company (2012), Education to Employment: Designing a System that Works, McKinsey&Company.http://mckinseyonsociety.com/education to employment/report/

MoNE, (2012a), Vocational Education and Training Workshop Report, Antalya

MoNE, (2012b), National Education Statistics –Formal Education, 2010 11, Ankara

MoNE, (2013), Vocational Education and Training Strategy Document and Action Plan (Draft) 2013 2017, GeneralDirectorate of Vocational Education and Training, Ankara

OECD, (2013), Education at a Glance, Turkey Country Note, Paris.http://www.oecd.org/edu/Turkey_EAG2013%20Country%20Note.pdf

SETA, Foundation for Political, Economic, and Social Research, (2012), Türkiye’nin nsan Kayna n n Belirlenmesi, Ankara

Tan, J.P, Kiong Hock Lee, Alexandria Valerio, and Joy Yoo Jeung Nam (2013), “What Matters in Workforce Development:A Framework and Tool for Analysis,” Education Department, World Bank (mimeo)

TEPAV, Economic Research Foundation of Turkey (2012), Financial Monitoring Report on 2012 Budget of Turkey, Ankara.

Turkstat, Turkish Statistical Institute (2013), Annual Statistics

Turkstat, Turkish Statistical Institute (2013a), Exports by SITC Rev. 3 [Foreign Trade Data Aggregate Table].

Turkstat, Turkish Statistical Institute (2013b), Labor Force Status of 15 24 Age Group. [Labor Force Survey AggregateTable].

World Bank (2005), Turkey Education Sector Study: Sustainable pathways to an effective, equitable, and efficienteducation system for preschool through secondary school education, Report No 32450 TU, Washington, DC.

World Bank (2013a) World Development Indicators: General Directorate P Growth (Annual %), Washington DC.

World Bank (2013b), Turkey: Managing Labor Markets through the Economic Cycle, Washington DC.

World Bank (2013c), Promoting Excellence in Turkey’s Schools, Washington DC.



List of informants

Ministry of National Education (MoNE)

Mr. Omer Acikgoz, former Director General of VET

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mustafa Kemal Bicerli, Director General of LLL

Ms. Sennur Cetin, Head of Social Partners and Projects Department

Mr. Feridun Saka, Expert

Ministry of Development

Mr. Ahmet Alper Ege, Director General of Social Sectors (former Head of Education Department)

Mr. Gokhan Guder, Head of Employment and Work Life Department

Ms. Muserref Kucukbayrak, Senior Associate

Mr. Serdar Polat, Associate

Turkish Employment Agency (ISKUR)

Mr. Asim Keskin, Deputy Director General

Mr. Askin Toren, Head of External Relations and Projects Department

Mr. Cagatay Gokay, Senior Associate

Mr. Feridun Kaya, former Division Chief

Ms. Candan Acar, Associate

Vocational Qualifications Authority (VQA)

Mr. Yakup H. Coskun, Examination and Certification Department, Associate

Think Tanks, Academia, Civil Society

Ms. Aylin Gezguc, Koc Holding, External Relations & Corporate Responsibility Coordinator

Ms. Burcu Gunduz, Koc Holding, Corporate Social Responsibility Associate

Mr. Insan Tunali, Koc University, Associate Dean of College of Administrative Sciences and Economics

Mr. Bekir Gur, SETA Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research, Director

ERG, Education Reform Initiative, Sabanci University

TEPAV, Economic Policy Research Foundation of Turkey

BETAM, Bahcesehir University Center for Economic and Social Research

TUSIAD, Turkish Industry and Business Association

TISK, Turkish Confederation of Employer Associations

MESS Foundation, Turkish Employers' Association of Metal Industries

Mr. Ibrahim Betil, Teacher Academy Foundation

Dr. Serdar Sayan, TOBB University



International Organizations

Mr. Ozan Cakmak, ILO

Ms. Berna Bayazit, UNDP

Participants of the Validation WorkshopMinistry of National Education (MoNE)

Mr. Yusuf Cidem, Head of Monitoring and Evaluation Department

Mr. Feridun Saka, Expert

Ministry of Development

Ms. Muserref Kucukbayrak, Senior Associate

Ms. Asli Dolu, Associate

Ms. Feray Eldeniz, Associate

Turkish Employment Agency (ISKUR)

Mr. Volkan Oz, Senior Associate

Mr. Cagatay Gokay, Senior Associate

Mr. Oguzhan Kupeli, Senior Associate

Mr. Mehmet Bayhan, Senior Associate

Mr. Mustafa Ozen, Senior Associate

Mr. Oguzhan Cavdar, Associate

Mr. Fatih Kan, Associate

Ms. Sebnem Isik, Associate

Mr. Ismail Demir, Associate

Mr. Ramazan Begboga, Associate

Ms. Nuriye Dirik, Associate

Vocational Qualifications Authority (VQA)

Mr. Yakup H. Coskun, Senior Associate



Annex 5: SABER WfD Scores

Policy Goal Policy Action Topic

Dimen

sion

1

2.9

G1 3.0 Provide sustained advocacy for WfD at the top leadership level 3.0G1_T1 3G1_T2 3

G2 2.8

Establish clarity on the demand for skills and areas of critical constraint 3.5G2_T1 4G2_T2 3

Engage employers in setting WfD priorities and in enhancing skills upgrading forworkers 2.3

G2_T3 3G2_T4 2G2_T5 2

G3 3.0 Formalize key WfD roles for coordinated action on strategic priorities 3.0G3_T1 3G3_T2 3G3_T3 3

Dimen

sion

2

2.5

G4 2.3

Provide stable funding for effective programs in initial, continuing and targetedvocational education and training 2.3

G4_T1 infoG4_T2 2G4_T3 2G4_T4 3

Monitor and enhance equity in funding for training 2.3G4_T5_IVET 2G4_T5_CVET 2G4_T5_ALMP 3

Facilitate sustained partnerships between training institutions and employers 2.0 G4_T6 2

G5 2.6

Broaden the scope of competency standards as a basis for developing qualificationsframeworks 3.0

G5_T1 3G5_T2 3

Establish protocols for assuring the credibility of skills testing and certification 3.0G5_T3 2G5_T4 3G5_T5 4

Develop and enforce accreditation standards for maintaining the quality of trainingprovision 2.0

G5_T6 infoG5_T7 2G5_T8 2G5_T9 2

G6 2.7

Promote educational progression and permeability through multiple pathways,including for TVET students 3.0

G6_T1 3G6_T2 3

Strengthen the system for skills certification and recognition 2.5G6_T3 2G6_T4 3

Enhance support for skills acquisition byworkers, job seekers and the disadvantaged 2.5G6_T5 2G6_T6 3

Dimen

sion

3

2.2

G7 2.2

Encourage and regulate non state provision of training 2.2

G7_T1 4G7_T2 2G7_T3 2G7_T4 1

Combine incentives and autonomy in the management of public training institutions 2.2G7_T5 2G7_T6 2G7_T7 2.5

G8 1.8

Integrate industry and expert input into the design and delivery of public trainingprograms 1.8

G8_T1 2.8G8_T2 2.3G8_T3 1G8_T4 1

Recruit and support administrators and instructors for enhancing the marketrelevance of public training programs 2.0

G8_T5 2G8_T6 2

G9 2.5 Expand the availability and use of policy relevant data for focusing providers'attention on training outcomes, efficiency and innovation 2.5

G9_T1 2.8G9_T2 2.3G9_T3 2.5



Annex 6: Authorship and AcknowledgementsThis report is the product of collaboration between Ahmet Levent Yener (Senior Human Development Specialist, WorldBank), the Education Reform Initiative and staff at the World Bank comprising Özgür Avcuo lu, and I l Oral (JuniorProfessional Associates), as well as Jee Peng Tan and Rita Costa, Viviana Venegas Roseth, Brent Parton, and Graham ColinJones, leader and members, respectively, of the SABER WfD team based in the World Bank’s Education Global Practice.Ahmet Levent Yener et al collected the data using the SABER WfD data collection instrument, prepared initial drafts ofthe report, and finalized the report; the Bank team scored the data, designed the template for the report and madesubstantive contributions to the final write up. This report has benefited from suggestions and feedback from William D.Wiseman (Program Leader for Social Inclusion for Turkey,World Bank), and Ximena Vanessa del Carpio (Senior Economist).Program assistants Elif Yükseker and Gözde Y lmaztürk provided valuable support to complete the report.

The research team gratefully acknowledges the generous financial support of the Government of the United Kingdomthrough its Department of International Development’s Partnership for Education Development with the World Bankwhich makes it possible for HDNED’s SABER WfD team to provide technical support to the principal investigator in theform of standardized tools for and guidance on data collection, analysis and reporting. Finally, the research teamacknowledges the support of all the participants from relevant public agencies, and others who have contributed to thereport and its findings, including informants, survey respondents, participants at various consultation workshops, as wellas other members of the SABER WfD team at the World Bank: Ryan Flynn, Kiong Hock Lee, Joy Yoo Jeung Nam andAlexandria Valerio.



The Systems Approach for Better Education Results (SABER)initiative produces comparative data and knowledge on education policies and institutions, with the aim of helping countries systematically strengthen their education systems. SABER evaluates the quality of education policies against evidence-based global standards, using new diagnostic tools and detailed policy data. The SABER country reports give all parties with a stake in educational results—from administrators, teachers, and parents to policymakers and business people—an accessible, objective snapshot showing how well the policies of their country's education system are oriented toward ensuring that all children and youth learn.

This report focuses specifically on policies in the area of workforce development.

This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed inthis work do not necessarily reflect the views of TheWorld Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. TheWorldBank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shownon anymap in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of TheWorld Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsementor acceptance of such boundaries.

www.worldbank.org/education/saber

Documents

SABER WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENTwbgfiles.worldbank.org/documents/hdn/ed/saber/supporting... · 2015-05-05 · Turkey WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT SABER Country Report 2012 Dimensions Status 1