Sustainability of Dual Vocational Education in Georgia: Challenges and Development Opportunities

Maia Toidze

Batumi Shota Rustaveli State University

Batumi, Georgia

https://orcid.org/0009-0007-1179-7763

ABSTRACT

This article analyses trends in the development of dual vocational education and training (dual VET) in Georgia, the challenges affecting its sustainability, and opportunities to improve the model. The study combines a comparative analysis of Georgian and European experience with official statistics for 2016–2025 and the practical experience of educational institutions and partner organisations involved in delivering dual programmes. Its purpose is to assess the current state of dual VET in Georgia and examine the institutional, financial and dual programme-development mechanisms that shape the model’s flexibility and sustainability within the national vocational education system. The findings show that between 2016 and 2022 dual VET developed through piloting, accumulated experience and gradual expansion. From 2023 onwards, however, the number of dual programmes, enrolments and implementing institutions fell sharply. Following the introduction of legal rules governing training-enterprise status, obtaining that status became a major systemic challenge. Only 21 companies had obtained it, suggesting that the new requirements were not equally realistic across sectors. The construction sector is especially illustrative: some partner companies prefer short-term training and direct recruitment to participation in a lengthy dual programme. The article also examines the requirement that more than half of the credits in vocational modules be achieved in a real working environment. Current funding rules and Education Management Information System (EMIS) administration link this requirement to a strict allocation of learning outcomes between the institution and the training enterprise. This can produce mechanical divisions that do not sufficiently consider where and when a competence can best be developed. The article therefore recommends revising the operating model, making the award of training-enterprise status more flexible and supportive, and aligning funding and EMIS rules with the practical needs of dual learning