Vocational education has an important and respected place within any modern education system. Economies need skilled technicians, craftspeople, hospitality professionals, digital specialists, carers and many other practically trained workers. For some young people, vocational learning can also provide a more engaging and meaningful educational experience than a predominantly academic curriculum. However, recognising the value of vocational education does not automatically mean that vocational students should be educated separately during their secondary-school years.

The debate surrounding vocational secondary schools therefore requires considerable care. The real question is not whether vocational education is valuable; clearly, it is. The more difficult question is whether young adolescents should be separated into different educational environments according to perceived academic ability, interests or future occupational pathways at a stage when they are still developing.

There are certainly advantages to vocational secondary education. Some students thrive when learning is practical, applied and connected to real-life situations. A young person who struggles to see the relevance of conventional classroom learning may become considerably more motivated when mathematics, science, communication and technology are taught through practical applications. Recent international evidence supports this potential: the OECD reports that high-quality vocational education and training can strengthen engagement, support transitions into employment and develop skills that are relevant to changing labour markets, provided that programmes maintain strong general-education foundations and clear progression routes (OECD, 2023).

Vocational education can also introduce students to occupations and industries they might otherwise never encounter. Good programmes can strengthen teamwork, problem-solving, responsibility, creativity and communication while helping young people understand the relationship between education and employment. The International Labour Organization similarly emphasises that effective skills systems must combine technical competence with transferable skills, career guidance and opportunities for lifelong learning (ILO, 2022).

However, one of the fundamental problems arises when we assume that vocational education is particularly suitable for students who are less academically inclined. Academically gifted students have just as much right to vocational education as anybody else. A student who excels in mathematics may also possess an extraordinary talent for carpentry. A high-achieving science student might discover an aptitude for culinary arts, engineering, electronics or design. Intellectual ability and practical ability are not mutually exclusive.

Indeed, separating "academic" from "vocational" students risks perpetuating precisely the hierarchy that education systems should be trying to eliminate. It subtly communicates that some young people are thinkers while others are doers, when successful professionals in virtually every field need to be both.

There is also the problem of premature specialisation. At 12, 13 or 14 years of age, many young people simply do not know what they want to do professionally. Nor should we expect them to know. Adolescence is a period of discovery. Interests, abilities and aspirations can change dramatically.

A student fascinated by catering at 13 may want to become an engineer at 17. Someone interested in automotive technology may later discover an aptitude for psychology, architecture or medicine. Secondary education should therefore maximise possibilities rather than progressively restrict them. This concern is consistent with recent OECD analysis, which stresses the importance of flexible pathways, transferable skills and permeability between vocational, general and higher education rather than rigid early tracking (OECD, 2023).

Separate vocational pathways can also become educational tracks from which movement is theoretically possible but practically difficult. Differences in curricula, subject depth and entry requirements may eventually create barriers to further and higher education. The European Commission's monitoring of education and training systems continues to identify equity, permeability and access to lifelong learning as central challenges for vocational education, particularly where students' choices are strongly shaped by prior attainment or socioeconomic background (European Commission, 2023).

Perhaps an even more fundamental issue concerns the social purpose of schools.

Communities are not divided into separate populations of academic and vocational people. In everyday life, doctors live alongside electricians, academics alongside chefs, lawyers alongside mechanics and teachers alongside entrepreneurs. Their children play together, families interact and workplaces increasingly depend upon people with very different educational backgrounds collaborating successfully.

If our communities are not supposed to be segregated in this way, why should our schools be?

Schools do considerably more than deliver qualifications. They are miniature communities in which young people learn how to live alongside people whose abilities, personalities, backgrounds and aspirations differ from their own. Diversity within a school is therefore not an inconvenience to be managed; it is itself an educational resource.

When students of different abilities and interests learn together, the academically gifted student can learn from the practically gifted student, and vice versa. One form of intelligence should not automatically confer greater status than another.

Separate vocational schools may therefore unintentionally create social as well as educational segregation. If these institutions disproportionately attract students with lower previous academic attainment or from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds, differences between schools can gradually become differences in expectations, resources, reputation and opportunity. Research on educational tracking continues to warn that early selection can amplify inequalities when students from disadvantaged backgrounds are more likely to be placed in lower-status pathways or have fewer opportunities to transfer later (OECD, 2023; UNESCO, 2023).

Vocational education then risks acquiring precisely the stigma we claim to want to remove.

One must also ask whether creating separate institutions genuinely addresses disengagement. If a young person is struggling because of literacy difficulties, family circumstances, learning needs, poor attendance or negative educational experiences, transferring that student to a vocational school does not automatically resolve those difficulties. Without appropriate educational and psychosocial support, we have not solved the problem; we have merely moved it elsewhere. UNESCO's Global Education Monitoring work highlights that inclusion requires changes to curriculum, teaching, assessment, support services and school culture, not simply the creation of alternative institutions (UNESCO, 2023).

There are significant practical considerations as well. Genuine vocational education is expensive. Workshops, laboratories, training kitchens, specialist technology and industry-standard equipment require substantial investment and constant updating. Recruiting educators who possess both pedagogical expertise and current industry experience can also be challenging. The OECD has noted that the quality of vocational provision depends heavily on teacher expertise, employer partnerships, work-based learning and sustained investment in equipment and infrastructure (OECD, 2023).

Furthermore, education must be careful not to become excessively responsive to today's labour-market shortages. Economies change rapidly. Technologies disappear, industries restructure and occupations evolve. Training a 14-year-old too narrowly for today's labour market may leave that person poorly equipped for tomorrow's. The World Economic Forum's Future of Jobs Report 2023 similarly emphasises that technological change is increasing the importance of analytical thinking, creativity, resilience, technological literacy and lifelong learning alongside occupation-specific knowledge (World Economic Forum, 2023).

Perhaps, therefore, we should reverse the traditional question. Instead of asking which students should receive vocational education, we should ask why all students should not receive it.

A genuinely inclusive secondary system could provide every student with exposure to academic, technical, creative and vocational learning. Students could experience engineering, hospitality, health and social care, digital technology, entrepreneurship, design, crafts and other practical disciplines while retaining a strong common foundation in languages, mathematics, science, humanities and citizenship.

Specialisation could come later, when young people are mature enough to make informed decisions. Where earlier vocational pathways do exist, they should be designed with common core subjects, high expectations, recognised qualifications, effective career guidance and straightforward routes into further and higher education.

The strongest argument against separate vocational secondary schools is therefore not an argument against vocational education at all. Paradoxically, it is an argument for more vocational education-but vocational education that belongs to everyone.

A child should not have to be labelled "vocational" to learn a trade, just as a child should not have to be labelled "academic" to study science or literature.

Schools should reflect the communities they serve: diverse, interconnected and composed of people with different strengths who nevertheless live and work together. If inclusion is a principle we value in society, it should also be a principle reflected in the organisation of our schools.

Vocational education should open doors. We should be very careful that, in attempting to create those doors, we do not build walls between our children.