Three Paths from Vocational to Higher Education: How Students Navigate Educational Risk
Their article, Risk-averse transitions: transfer choice points and institutional strategies in VET-to-HE pathways, published in the European Journal of Higher Education, examines how students in Russia navigate the transition from vocational education and training (VET) to higher education (HE). Drawing on nationally representative longitudinal data from the Trajectories in Education and Careers (TrEC) study, the authors conceptualise this transition as a sequence of “Transfer Choice Points”–“the juncture where a student first decides to pursue university study after VET”. These decisions are shaped by students' individual characteristics and the institutional contexts in which they are made.
The analysis identifies three distinct transfer trajectories. The Bypass trajectory can describe students who plan their route to higher education early, often using VET as a strategic alternative to competitive university admission. These students tend to achieve stronger academic results and have parents who are more highly educated. The Safety Net trajectory involves students who initially seek direct entry to HE but presumably turn to VET after facing difficulties with admission. The authors suggest that Experience-driven Mobility describes students whose aspirations for higher education emerge during or after their vocational studies. They tend to have weaker academic results and come from less advantaged social backgrounds.
These trajectories reflect students’ socio-structural positions, supporting the argument that the perceived costs, benefits, and risks of educational transitions are shaped not only by individual background but also by institutional context.”
The findings show that institutional arrangements play an important role in shaping these trajectories. Compared with VET graduates who do not transfer to higher education, students from university-affiliated VET schools are more than three times as likely to follow the Safety Net trajectory. This supports the idea that such institutions can serve as a “safety net", helping students maintain a pathway to higher education following an unsuccessful attempt at direct admission.
At the same time, students whose aspirations for higher education emerge later appear to have fewer institutional pathways supporting their transition. Their progression depends more heavily on personal perseverance than on the characteristics of the VET or higher education institutions they attend. The authors argue that this points to a gap between policy ambitions to widen access to higher education through vocational pathways and the support available to students with late-emerging aspirations. Targeted counselling, academic bridging and clearer progression mechanisms within non-university VET institutions could help to make these pathways more inclusive.
The Russian case demonstrates how selection rules and institutional linkages are associated with stratified pathways, segmenting students not only by academic performance and family background but also by the timing of their decisions."