{"word_count": 393, "character_count": 2758}
Don Zoellner (2019) Journal of Vocational Education &#38; Training, Online firstAbstract. In a number of advanced market democracies the role of public technical and vocational education and training institutions has been called into question. This is one result of a singular dominant public policy discourse favouring the provision of public services through contracting out in competitive markets. With the limitations of this default policy setting becoming increasingly apparent there is an opportunity to identify a new narrative to facilitate a transition to a less contestable training market environment. In particular, the rationale and justification for the direct public provision of vocational education through government-owned and operated institutions can be re-examined in non-market terms. However, the deep penetration of the reductionist and simplistic pro-choice competitive ideation into current policy environments has resulted in a limited, often dualistic, range of conceptual options being used by analysts. This article investigates alternative concepts before settling on the use of institutional logics to articulate the multiple contributions to the provision of the skills and knowledge made by publicly-owned institutions.Excerpt. “Given marketisation’s monopoly over public policy  development, other possibilities will have to demonstrate a similar  level of comprehensiveness and reasonableness. In other words, a  potential substitute can be operationally  defined as a logic. Initial research identified two literatures that  deploy logics to describe how socio-economic systems and institutions  function. The first is described by Maurice, Sellier, and Silvestre  (1986) and it explicitly refers to TVET in what has  been described as a ‘logic of difference’ in two European settings  (Powell et al. 2012, 405). The second is the North American  ‘institutional logics’ which have yet to be extensively applied to the  analysis of TVET policy. They offer novel ways of thinking  about the contributions public TVET institutions make to national  training systems. This early search for alternative conceptualisations  found also that institutional logics might be related to the nascent, at  least outside France and Germany, sociology of  conventions which can use combinations of ‘different logics of  coordination’. It will be argued that the logics of Maurice, Sellier and  Silvestre, if set up as binaries, lead back to marketisation. The  sociology of conventions has been found to be fundamentally  different from the institutional logics narrative. The findings suggest  that institutional logics can be used to produce a non-market  justification for the role of public TVET institutions.”p. 3Link to the review