The Status Relationship Between Academic and Vocational Education in Urban Norway: Pupils’ Deferential Attitudes to Condescending Opinions

Abstract

(1) Background: This article investigates the status relationship between academic and vocational tracks in the four largest cities in Norway. While previous qualitative research has mainly examined academic and vocational tracks separately, this article includes both to highlight the importance of looking at the relationship between them. (2) Method: A thematic qualitative analysis is conducted to illustrate how interviewees in focus groups express practical and academic ambitiousness. (3) Results: The findings indicate that the relationship between vocational- and academic-track pupils is shaped by a perception of vocational education as a second-tier option. Pupils from the academic tracks express condescending opinions about them, whereas those on vocational tracks demonstrate a deferential attitude towards the academic pupils. This hierarchical distinction becomes particularly noticeable when both tracks are situated within the same institutional context. Thus, the article sheds light on the dynamics of status differences between vocational and academic education that indicate a belief in meritocratic principles. This is of relevance for many countries beyond Norway.

1. Introduction

Over the past 30 years, distinct changes have occurred within the institutional structure of upper secondary education in Norway, including Reform 94 (Olsen and Seljestad 1997; Thuen 2017). The reform aimed to establish a more unified upper secondary education system by streamlining upper secondary tracks (Hegna et al. 2012, p. 229). This can be viewed as an effort to make the various tracks more similar, motivated by the idea of social equality (Thuen 2017). However, the fact that vocational education continues to become increasingly “academicized” may also be an expression of the status dominance of the academic track (Olsen 2012).

Both scholars and international organisations have highlighted that vocational education is currently experiencing a crisis of status (Billett et al. 2022; Billett 2020; UNESCO 2022). Wyman et al. (2017) introduced the phrase “university or bust” to illustrate the relatively low status associated with vocational pathways among Australian pupils. A similar tendency can be observed in Norway, where a prognosis indicates a shortage of approximately 85,000 skilled workers with trade certificates by 2035 (SSB 2020). Even though approximately half of Norwegian cohorts now choose vocational education, there are still higher levels of drop-out in vocational tracks and admission to academic tracks demands higher grades. Studying the relationship between pupils at academic and vocational tracks is important for widening the understanding of the relationship between these two educational paths.

The transition from lower secondary to upper secondary school marks the point where Norwegian pupils, for the first time, enter either a vocational or academic study path. The unique case of Norway marks a contrast relative to other countries, where differentiation into vocational and academic tracks takes place at an earlier stage or is more strongly stratified (Busemeyer 2014). Therefore, it is of particular interest to examine the relationship between the two in this context.

Against this backdrop, the following is the overarching research question of this article: What types of ambitions do pupils on different tracks have? How are perceived differences and similarities between academic and vocational tracks expressed among upper secondary school pupils in focus groups? What opinions do they express about pupils on different tracks? What do their attitudes say about the perceived status relationship between them? Concepts that emerged from the analysis are academic vs. practical ambitiousness and condescending vs. deferential attitudes. The analysis indicates that academic-track pupils have academic ambitions and openly display condescending attitudes towards pupils on vocational tracks. The latter show practical ambitiousness and have a deferential attitude toward the academic-track pupils. These attitudes occur in a meritocratic system that rewards theoretically gifted pupils and undervalue practical subjects. Thus, they legitimise condescension towards pupils in vocational fields. The findings may therefore provide insights into some of the reasoning behind the persistent trend towards poor recruitment in VET internationally (Aarkrog 2020).

2. Vocational Education and Academic Tracks in Norway: Two Converging Paths?

The current Norwegian intake system for upper secondary education is as follows: At the end of lower secondary, at age 15 or 16, pupils decide whether to pursue an academic track or a vocational one. Choices are formally independent of their parents. They must apply for both a track and a specific school, and intake to all tracks is determined by pupils’ average grades from lower secondary, making the admission entirely grade-based and competitive.1 Vocational tracks have significantly lower intake requirements than their academic counterparts.2 Data used in this article is based on focus groups conducted with pupils on both track types in their first year of upper secondary school in urban areas. Academic tracks are divided into several paths leading to qualification for higher education; however, in this article, it is the main academic track, i.e., generalised studies, that is examined. Likewise, there are various vocational tracks pupils can opt for, but this article examines only electrical engineering and health care.

The research questions merit a brief historical overview of important reforms that have shaped and developed these two distinctive educational paths to provide context. In 1974, the Law on Upper Secondary Education was passed, ending the formal divide between vocational schools and the gymnas (academic upper secondary school). The goal was to coordinate post-compulsory education in order to make it more coherent and to establish similar regulations for both tracks (Sass 2022). Twenty years later, another major upper-secondary reform was passed, Reform 94. Through this, vocational and academic tracks were further streamlined by introducing more theoretical subjects into all vocational tracks (Thuen 2017). In theory, this would make it easier for pupils to switch from an academic to a vocational track and vice versa, highlighting equalisation between them.

The reform introduced a supplementary-year course, an intensive programme that allows vocational pupils to achieve university admission qualifications within one year of the end of their education. In other words, vocational education is increasingly mirroring the academic path. On the one hand, this reduces the degree to which pupils are locked into an educational path. On the other hand, the increased flexibility may also diminish the distinctive features of vocational education, leaving pupils’ autonomy behind (Hegna et al. 2012; Olsen 2012).

3. Previous Research

Education is widely considered to be one of the most central areas of study within sociology. Traditionally, the literature in this field has focused on dimensions such as class, gender, educational choices, and the school as a channel for social mobility as well as reproduction (Hjellbrekke and Korsnes 2012; Hodkinson and Sparkes 1997; Johansen 2020; Knudsen 1980; Myklebust 2018; Reisel and Seehuus 2023). The articles by Myklebust (2018) and Reisel and Seehuus (2023) both focus on the relationship between gender norms and education. Myklebust examines gender-atypical educational choices among girls and finds that they often portray themselves as individuals who dare to choose untraditional paths. Reisel and Seehuus (2023) use survey data to explore gender norms among boys and girls in tenth grade, concluding that stigma is common among both boys and girls in relation to female-dominated fields of study. Johansen (2020) finds that women with vocational certificates in health and social care experience lower status and poorer working conditions than nurses in the same workplaces, which often lead them to pursue further education. A study conducted by Imdorf (2017) shows that discrimination in apprenticeship hiring is frequently justified by employers as pragmatic risk management influenced by institutional pressures, even though it relies on ethnic stereotypes and systematically excludes minority youth. These studies accentuate existing problematic working conditions within VET that may adversely affect its attractiveness and status among youth.

These studies contribute important insights but provide little comparative information about school characteristics and potential differences between educational tracks. However, school environments have also been studied in recent years, though mainly through an elite lens and with a focus on specific academically high-achieving schools (Halvorsen and Ljunggren 2021; Khan 2011; Landholt and Reh 2025; Pedersen et al. 2018; Persson 2023). The dominant trend is a focus on the social composition of such schools by conducting social class analyses to show how pupils from different social backgrounds navigate these institutions, e.g., by demonstrating how pupils acquire “ease” in relation to academic success (Khan 2011). Landholt and Reh (2025, p. 8) illuminate that students at highly selective public academic schools in Zürich perceive themselves as particularly responsible, independent, and deserving of their privileged status. These findings align with the literature on the field, which suggests that academic tracks are seen as the more prestigious option and that vocational tracks are understood as a “second tier” alternative (Reay 2020).

In Norway, research has been conducted on both vocational and academic tracks. Several studies have specifically focused on academic schools in the Oslo region. A key finding is that some of these schools have reputations as either “posh schools” or “nerd schools”, each with distinct pupil groups and competitive school environments (Halvorsen 2020; Halvorsen and Ljunggren 2021; Pedersen et al. 2018). Another study highlights stress related to academic grades (Pedersen and Eriksen 2019). This finding is consistent with international research indicating that pupils on academic tracks commonly encounter pressures associated with performance and testing (Eriksson and Sellström 2010; Gaztambide-Fernández 2009). Jackson (2006) demonstrates that displays of defiance, often functioning as a strategic response to fear of academic failure, show how pupils may cope with such competitive environments.

Among studies on vocational education in Norway, Vogt (2007) examines motivations for choosing vocational tracks and finds that the desire to do practical tasks is a decisive motivating factor among young men. Eriksen et al. (2021) study the significance of geographical location and find that working-class youth in rural areas often remain in their communities and seek employment in local cornerstone industries, which means vocational tracks are often chosen in these areas. Several studies on vocational education have emphasised the relationship between schooling and the formation of occupational identity (Abrahamsson 2007; Olesen 2001). Jørgensen (2020) argues that students enrolled in vocational tracks often experience a strong sense of belonging derived from the specificity of their chosen pathway, which, in turn, fosters perceptions of a smooth and predictable transition from education to work. Ferm et al. (2018) and Reegård (2016) contend that apprentices develop a collective occupational identity through lived practice. Ferm et al. (2018) demonstrate how industrial apprentices actively engage with peers and seek out role models. Reegård (2016) describes how the trust between supervisors and novices encourages a “learning by doing” environment.

Internationally, the overarching theme in recent research on vocational education has also been its current low status compared to its academic counterpart (Aarkrog 2020; Billett 2020; Chankseliani et al. 2015; Ozer and Perc 2020; Reay 2020). Several of these policy studies and shed light on possible measures to heighten vocational education’s perceived lower rank. For instance, Aarkrog (2020) points out that initiatives from policymakers in Denmark to improve VET recruitment ultimately failed. Thun et al. (2021) investigates how a collaboration between partners in the educational system and employers can support youth in making more informed and qualified educational decisions between vocational and general academic pathways. Reay (2020) analyses the class structure of the British school system and argues that the frame of meritocracy that is prevalent in today’s society benefits those who are well off by rewarding the academically gifted. She concludes that “an inclusive society would need a much more inclusive conception of merit than the one currently subscribed to, one that encompasses practical as well as academic skills, but also creativity, caring, compassion and collegiality” (Reay 2020, p. 412). In spite of the differences between the British and Norwegian school systems, Reay’s arguments are important for understanding the findings in the following analysis.

There is little qualitative research comparing vocational and academic tracks within a single study. It is already well established that the pupils in these two pathways are different in terms of socioeconomic status. Norwegian pupils on academic tracks, on average, come from a higher social background than their vocational peers (Hovdhaugen et al. 2021; Lorentzen 2025), and the two groups also differ in interests and career aspirations (Diseth et al. 2020; Rolfsman 2020). A comparative study can therefore provide new knowledge about the complex relation between them.

4. Data and Methods

This article seeks to use concepts and theories in a sensitising way (Blumer 1954). It is, to some extent, also inspired by the work of Glaser and Strauss (1967) and their ideas about theoretical sensitivity. Both the research questions and the sampling procedure are informed by concepts from existing research, while the analytical categories presented in the frame of analysis section are based on themes that emerged during the analytical process. In this way, existing concepts found in the literature serve as guidelines. This approach does not rely on one single theoretical framework; the article embraces a conceptual point of departure. In this specific paper, research on the inequality between vocational and academic education is an important backbone for the frame and interpretation of the analysis.

Data in this article stem from an international project on school choice. The Norwegian part of the project includes qualitative data collected from upper secondary school pupils in Norway’s four largest cities: Oslo, Bergen, Trondheim, and Stavanger. It consists of pupils’ reflections on their school choice in their first year (early autumn 2022). Our data includes interviewees from the main type of academic track, i.e., general studies, and two types of vocational tracks, i.e., electrical engineering and health care. As seen in previous studies, male-dominated fields such as electrical engineering tend to be perceived as higher status than female-dominated fields like health care.3

Schools were sampled strategically based on publicly available grade admission requirements for each school. Informed consent forms and information leaflets were circulated at the schools, as well as among parents, but pupils were old enough to consent themselves. Headteachers or other members of the school leadership provided contact details to a form teacher, and a time was arranged for a meeting with that person’s class. We informed the class about our project and handed out declarations of consent to those who wanted to participate. Nine focus groups were carried out at seven different schools: two in health care and two in electrical engineering. Five groups were conducted with pupils on academic tracks. At two of the schools, focus groups with both vocational and academic pupils were conducted, which gave an opportunity to examine the relationship between the two tracks when located within the same building. These are referred to as “combination schools” in the frame of analysis section.

Because the research team aimed at understanding group dynamics and shared perceptions of the pupils’ school environments, the use of focus groups was deemed an adequate method (Morgan 2017; Silverman 2014). The interview guide was adapted for 16-year-olds. Researchers also spent several hours at each school and took field notes to ensure a richer understanding of each school environment. Topics discussed in the focus groups included reflections on the school choice itself, thoughts about the pupils’ own school and classmates, and views on future occupations and perceptions of other schools and pupils. Each group consisted of a minimum of three and a maximum of six participants. Efforts were made to achieve gender balance. While this was not possible for the vocational tracks, the academic-track focus groups were gender-balanced. The focus groups had a duration ranging from one to two hours.

Open coding (Silverman 2014) was conducted, allowing analytical categories to emerge from the interviewee’s perspective. Coding the data in this manner reduces the risk of forcing data into a predefined overarching theoretical framework. Analysis followed Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic approach. The researcher begins by familiarising herself with the data material. Thereafter, the process of generating initial codes is started. These should consist of simple, preliminary labels based on patterns identified in the data set, often derived from terms that are frequently mentioned in the focus groups. In the subsequent stage, the level of abstraction is raised, and the initial codes are linked to broader themes (Braun and Clarke 2006). Findings were identified and coded using NVivo on a secure server, in line with current ethical guidelines regarding safe storage of sensitive research data. Pupils have been anonymised in our publications.

5. Frame of Analysis: Academic Versus Practical Ambitiousness

In the data, three categories emerge that characterise pupils’ perceptions of school environments. The first two categories—(1) academic ambitiousness and (2) practical ambitiousness—form an important basis for interpreting the third finding—(3) the relation between academic and vocational tracks and the experienced status difference between them.

5.1. Academic Ambitiousness

Pupils on academic tracks are more often concerned with attending schools where the level of academic ambition is high. They perceive themselves as pupils with strong abilities and therefore wish to attend an upper secondary school that aligns with this self-image. The quotation below illustrates key aspects of the pupils’ attitudes toward schoolwork.

Interviewer:

…would you say there’s a particular type of people who go here or is that just a myth?

Johnny:

The people at our school usually have slightly higher grades… and that often means they’re people who work hard and are mature.

 

[…]

Sara:

I feel like the ones who got in here have worked extra hard, since they know it’s a high-grade school, but I don’t really think there’s anything special about how people behave here. (Academic track)

Here, Johnny uses the argument of maturity, indicating that those who work hard are more adult-like. Johnny mentions that they “knew what they had to do”, meaning that they have a clearer sense of direction than pupils with lower grades; they are determined and make strategic decisions to reach their goals, whilst Sara thinks they are just ordinary hard-working pupils. As seen in the concluding discussion, these attitudes can be tied to a meritocratic educational context that is increasingly designed based on theoretical subjects’ terms.

This corresponds with the findings of Halvorsen (2020), who notes that pupils on academic tracks with high performance levels often have to “negotiate” between presenting themselves as extraordinary or as ordinary. A strong belief in the value of hard work is widespread: Doing well is perceived as a result of effort, and being surrounded by like-minded peers is viewed as desirable for academic success. Interviewees also frequently express being eager to learn and having an intrinsic motivation to acquire knowledge. This internal inspiration can also be understood as a type of autonomous motivation form, as found by Thun et al. (2021). Performance pressure is also discussed among some of the academic-track pupils. Although these pupils often seek an environment characterised by a strong desire to learn, it is also important for them to balance or prevent a potential collective pressure to perform, which may emerge in such schools.

Interviewer:

You mentioned grade pressure. Is there any pressure related to performing well at school?

 

[…]

Svein:

There are a lot of capable people in the class, maybe more than there were in lower secondary. But, yeah.

Inger:

I feel like people do want good grades, but the teachers have said, that we shouldn’t work on weekends. There’s probably some pressure from yourself, but not like, extreme. Not so much that it becomes uncomfortable

Olga:

I think people are pretty supportive, it’s not like, “Oh, you got that grade?”

Astrid:

There’s no competition.

Svein:

Here (…) you get a good learning environment. Even if it might be a bit harder to get good grades. I don’t know if that’s true. But maybe. (Academic track)

The interviewees express that their environment is inclusive and oriented toward learning rather than competition. Nevertheless, Inger points out that there is a certain degree of performance pressure, though it is directed inward rather than outward. It is, in other words, an individual rather than a collective form of pressure. It can also be interpreted as controlled motivation (Thun et al. 2021). The focus is on downplaying the performance pressure while emphasising the pleasure of learning. This attitude manifests itself despite the fact that the vast majority of the interviewees have not yet decided if and what they want to study after upper secondary school. Previous research has already shown that grades can often be a source of stress at certain upper secondary schools where schoolwork is regarded as very important (Eriksson and Sellström 2010; Gaztambide-Fernández 2009; Halvorsen 2020; Pedersen and Eriksen 2019).

Overall academic ambitiousness comes across in these focus groups. The intrinsic value of knowledge is important to Svein and his fellow pupils, and there is a wish to be part of an environment that shares this perspective.

Taking these results together, we see that high academic ambitions and a desire to associate with others who share this interest appear to be crucial for pupils on academic tracks. They experience a sense of closeness to academic learning environments, which they identify with.

5.2. Practical Ambitiousness

While pupils on academic tracks emphasise a strong focus on academic activities, pupils in vocational programmes hold a different attitude. They appear practically ambitious. The interviewees highlight that practical tasks are preferred over traditional school subjects:

Interviewer:

… What would you say is the main motivation?

Eivind:

I guess most people have seen one of those videos from such a workplace. There are flames and they’re all like ‘wohoo.’ It’s kind of motivating and looks like fun. Doing some physical work instead of just sitting inside and writing a message to someone who needs help from you.

Karl:

In an office.

Eivind:

Yeah, office work. It’s… I’d rather go out and do something than sit inside all day.

William:

Yeah. And I’ve heard they have a room with a good breakfast… good lunch… a nice roast in the cafeteria. Doesn’t sound bad to be there at all. (Electrical engineering)

The interviewees do not find office work particularly appealing. As Eivind puts it, there is more going on at an industrial site, and you do not have to sit inside all the time. In other words, there is an idea that learning should take place through practical tasks. This accentuates a different type of autonomous motivation (Thun et al. 2021) among vocational students compared to their academic peers.

This attitude is echoed by pupils on similar vocational tracks. A practically ambitious attitude is present in the form of a desire to have more time to work on something that is concrete:

Interviewer:

…have any of you ever considered taking the academic track?

 

[…]

Pia:

I’m quite happy with my choice.

Mia:

Uh… I’ve thought about it because I want a general university entrance qualification. Then… I’ll get both a trade certificate and general university entrance qualification… Those of us in the healthcare sector are guaranteed a job once we finish our apprenticeship, because there’s such a shortage of us. And those who take general studies, they have to continue studying because I hate school… like… my whole life, and then I’d rather work practically than just have a lot of subjects.

Interviewer:

Right. And what about you, have you ever considered it?

Kai:

…My girlfriend is attending an academic track. She has lots of homework, little free time, and many tests. So from what I see with her, never. (Health care)

The quotes illustrate that sitting still at a desk all the time is not valued among these pupils. Working on something practical is preferred. Furthermore, the interviewees emphasise that they do not want academic homework to dominate their everyday lives. The importance ascribed to practical work in male-dominated vocational programmes is by no means a new phenomenon (Olsen 2012; Vogt 2017). These data show that pupils in health care, which is female-dominated, also emphasise similar preferences.

Some of the interviewees, however, wish to pursue higher education in the future, as exemplified by Mia in the quote above. Statistics show that about one in four vocational pupils end up taking the supplementary preparation course for higher education instead of entering an apprenticeship and receiving a trade certificate (Hagen 2025). This development has long been deemed problematic by the Norwegian government (Regjeringen 2022). Part of the reason is that few apprenticeship positions are available, which can “push” some pupils to choose the additional year of study. However, it may also be that certain pupils prefer a more practical learning path toward further studies.

The practical ambitiousness often hails from personal experiences:

Interviewer:

How did you end up here? How did you make your choice?

Malin:

I chose it because I want to work with children, and I find it exciting to see how people and children are developing.

Karin:

It’s fun to learn about the development of youth and children.

Maren:

I’ve always wanted to become a child and youth worker, ever since I was in seventh grade.

Interviewer:

Since seventh grade? That long?

Maren:

Yes. I had a niece when I was twelve, and since then I’ve been spending time with her and looking after her. So that’s why I want to work with children. (Health care)

Maren highlights how the experience of looking after her niece piqued her interest in working with children. In other words, Maren’s aspirations stem from practice. This finding is consistent with previous studies emphasising the significance of practicality in identity formation among vocational pupils (Ferm et al. 2018; Jørgensen 2020; Reegård 2016).

In summary, it is evident that a positive narrative of practical work permeates the environments of vocational tracks. The pupils find theoretical schoolwork unappealing and do not envision a future behind a desk. The interviewees often have negative experiences associated with traditional academic work and positive experiences tied to practical activities, which form the basis of their practical ambitions.

5.3. The Relation Between Academic and Vocational Tracks and the Experienced Status Differences Between Them

The interviewees’ experience a distinct status difference between the two tracks. It appears that familiarity with academic tasks is more highly valued and regarded as “better” by interviewees on both vocational and academic tracks. It is not uncommon for pupils on both vocational and academic tracks to describe schools with a predominance of vocational tracks as schools with poor environments, whereas schools specialising in academic tracks are more often talked about in a positive manner.

Certain academic-track schools with strict intake requirements enjoy what is frequently referred to in the literature as “elite status” (Halvorsen 2020; Khan 2011; Landholt and Reh 2025; Pedersen et al. 2018). Some of the academic schools in the sample derive their status partly from the fact that their pupils are high-achieving and therefore subject to high grade requirements for admission.

Vocational tracks also exhibit status hierarchies. Within vocational education, high grade requirements for entry can serve as a means through which interviewees experience a sense of high status in a similar manner to their academic-track peers. However, when different educational tracks are co-located within the same building, the status differences between them become the most visible. When vocational and academic tracks are situated together, the latter tend to be perceived by pupils as having higher status. According to the vocational pupils at the two combination schools in the sample, this is primarily related to the school environment. Tracks with high grade point averages are generally described as more “proper”, and if pupils themselves attend a school that has such a track, the pupils perceive the overall environment as “better”, even though their own track may not have strict admission criteria:

Interviewer:

Was it important to you to attend a school with a good environment or higher admission grades?

Kåre:

Yes.

Dennis:

Yeah.

Dennis:

Yeah, I’d rather go to a school with a good environment than a bad one, but I don’t have anything against people who are ghetto or anything like that. (Electrical engineering)

Although they perceive their own school as better than the “ghetto schools”, their school nonetheless offers several vocational tracks with low entry requirements, including the one they attend.

The vocational pupils at these combination schools, however, do not report getting along well with the academic-track pupils at their own school. This is interesting, given that the interviewees actively want to attend these schools precisely because these are perceived as offering “better” environments, characterised, for example, by less substance use and being considered less “ghetto”. Nevertheless, several interviewees express a kind of inferiority in relation to the academic-track pupils that gives a sense of deference. In the focus groups conducted at the combination schools, participants highlighted an experience of not fully connecting or getting along with pupils on the academic tracks:

Sondre:

I mean, us in the electrical engineering track and those in social work probably talk a bit more with each other.

Ole:

Yeah.

Sondre:

But there isn’t much contact with the academic track pupils.

Ole:

No. The ones in the academic track think they’re much better than everyone else.

Finn:

Yeah.

Ole:

I’ve heard that people in the academic track think that those in the electrical engineering track are the ones who try to act a bit tough, while the academic track is for those who are better at school, whereas the health pupils are a bit different again.

 

[…]

Dennis:

They do have much higher grades than us. And then you can kind of… we might exaggerate that idea that they’re much better than us just because they have higher grades. And then they don’t want to talk to us, because they’re kind of in their own class. Or league. (Electrical engineering)

Sondre notes that pupils on the two vocational tracks get along better with each other than with the pupils on the academic track. This is noteworthy, given that the electrical engineering and health tracks share few similarities beyond both being vocational programmes. Furthermore, Ole points out that this sense of discomfort stems from the academic-track pupils’ attitude of superiority and a condescending attitude towards vocational pupils. Dennis points to a kind of hierarchy in which the vocational pupils express deference to the academic-track pupils. This theme also emerged in another focus group at a different combination school:

Interviewer:

What do you think about the pupils in the academic track?

Pia:

… But I’ve noticed that the academic track pupils have something against us in health, because just a week ago there was this thing where some of them took pictures, posted them, and were hating us. But when you think about it, it’s them who end up working at a supermarket and us who end up in a…

Mia:

Proper job.

Pia:

Yeah, and we can get a proper job earlier than they can and everything. I don’t know… I don’t think I would have chosen the academic track even if I had the opportunity, to be honest. (Health care)

As seen in the quote, the vocational- and academic-track pupils do not experience a sense of mutual connection, despite attending the same school. This suggests the presence of a certain level of social separation between them—one that becomes particularly visible and noticeable when the different tracks are located within the same school building. The vocational pupils experience what they consider condescending attitudes and a lack of respect from pupils on the academic track. This happens even though vocational pupils actively seek admission to such combined schools because of the perception that they offer a better social environment. This could, perhaps, invite calls for lessons in inclusivity and equality and respect for all.

The following quotation from an academic-track focus group at one of the combined schools accentuates the point outlined above. The pupils express an awareness of the distinction between those on the academic track and those on the vocational tracks, and the former are regarded as superior:

Interviewer:

You mentioned interests; do you have the same interests as those at the electrical engineering?

 

[…]

Asgeir:

Different tracks, yeah, but electrical isn’t that different. I’ve talked to some of them; they’re very nice and sensible. But many of the guys who applied for electrical engineering did so because they wanted to go to this school because of the environment, but didn’t have good enough grades for the academic track, so they chose electrical instead. So, in a way, they applied partly out of interest as well. But many apply because they actually want to do vocational education too. It’s a bit of a mix. Still, many of them don’t share the same interests.

Interviewer:

What do the rest of you think?

 

[…]

Frida:

The academic track pupils kind of “hate on” the ones in electrical engineering, in a way.

Cecilia:

Yeah.

Frida:

Like, we kind of look down on them.

Interviewer:

And the rest of you, what do you think?

Thomas:

I agree…. (Academic track)

Although Asgeir points out that, at the end of the day, they are not fundamentally all that different, and Frida, Cecilia, and Thomas agree that the academic-track pupils “hate on” those in the electrical engineering track and detach themselves from this group of pupils. It is worth noting that it is the academic-track pupils who “hate on” the pupils on the electrical engineering track. There is no indication that this sentiment is mutual; instead, vocational pupils defer to the academic pupils’ condescending behaviour. This suggests a perceived hierarchy in which the academic track has higher prestige and, consequently, enjoys higher status. In addition, Asgeir highlights that the electrical engineering track functions somewhat as a “leftover option” for those who did not achieve good enough grades for the academic track, underscoring the sentiment of status superiority (Aarkrog 2020; Chankseliani et al. 2015; Ozer and Perc 2020; Reay 2020). Similar attitudes are held against schools with only vocational tracks:

Sivert:

There are some places in that are a bit more dangerous, and the people who live there tend to go to a certain school…

Interviewer:

So what schools are that?

Maja:

They have people from everywhere.

 

And boys mostly attend vocational programs there, while the girls do study or health programs.

Interviewer:

But you do have vocational tracks here too?.

Rebecca:

Electrical engineering.

Interviewer:

And health- and social work and so on. You mentioned the reputation, drugs and such; is that something people want to avoid because of other interests? Is that the stigma?

Daniel:

There are people who do drugs at this school too, but they don’t do it on the school grounds.

Rebecca:

You’d want to keep a bit of a distance from that. (Academic track)

 

The vocational track schools are understood as schools for people who did not have many alternatives and for those who use drugs publicly:

Interviewer:

What is that school like?

Felix:

It’s a crap school, really. I’m from there and I know many people who attend that school. It’s not unusual to smoke marijuana during the breaks there.

Roy:

I feel like many go there either because they live nearby, or because they didn’t couldn’t get into any other school…

 

[…]

Celine:

I agree with everything the others said. (Academic track).

This openly condescending attitude is quite astonishing in its rudeness. It is a piece of important empirical evidence in the Norwegian context, which is often portrayed as egalitarian, with people tending not to think and talk about status hierarchies (Skarpenes 2007).

6. Concluding Discussion

This article discusses how school environments are talked about in focus groups at upper secondary schools. The two main educational upper secondary pathways are situated within an educational system in which vocational tracks have increasingly been modelled on academic tracks. The analyses are conducted against this contextual backdrop. The findings are interpreted in relation to the empirically grounded concepts of academic and practical ambitiousness, as well as deference and condescension. The analysis describes the environments as academically oriented or practically oriented, providing a basis for closeness to one’s own field of study and distancing from other tracks and pupils. While recent qualitative research has examined environments within individual schools—most often academic ones (Eide 2021; Halvorsen 2020; Halvorsen and Ljunggren 2021; Landholt and Reh 2025; Pedersen et al. 2018; Persson 2023)—this study focuses on the relationship between vocational and academic tracks: What characteristics do they share, what distinguishes them, and how do pupils on different tracks reflect on each other? The results show that status differences manifest themselves between academic tracks and vocational tracks.

The interviewees on the academic tracks in the sample deliberately sought out an environment characterised by academic ambition. These pupils enjoy engaging in traditional forms of schoolwork; they feel a sense of closeness to such activities, which also provide status within their peer environment and fosters a feeling of maturity, as expressed in the focus groups. This engagement generates a sense of reaping the rewards of hard work: These pupils demonstrate a strong belief in meritocracy, in line with Reay’s (2020) discussion, and experience what they describe as mastery through theoretical effort. At the same time, pupils may experience some pressure to perform. It is primarily within the focus groups conducted at the academic track that discussions emerge concerning the meaning and importance of grades. Performance pressure is therefore something that academic-track pupils must navigate. It appears to serve as an inspiring factor for individual achievements and is thus experienced as something positive.

Previous research has also found that pupils on academic tracks frequently experience grade-related pressure (Eriksson and Sellström 2010; Gaztambide-Fernández 2009; Halvorsen 2020; Pedersen and Eriksen 2019). Some studies use the concepts of effortless achievement and ease to describe some ways to manage this pressure (Jackson 2006; Khan 2011). Handling performance pressure “in the right way”, that is, maintaining what outwardly appears to be a natural and relaxed relationship to achievement and grades, can be seen as an expression of what Khan (2011) defines as ease. However, being too openly concerned with grades might lead to social disapproval; the distinction between being seen as ambitious and being labelled a “try hard” is thin (Khan 2011, p. 121). Discussions from our focus groups suggest that similar dynamics may exist within these academically oriented environments despite not all of them being elite in the same sense as the boarding school examined in Khan’s study.

By contrast, the vocational pupils detach themselves from the emphasis on academic achievements. They find a sense of closeness to practical work—or as Eivind puts it, they want to “…do something physical and not just sit inside and write a message to someone who needs your help.” This practical orientation provides status within their own peer groups, and it symbolises a different type of autonomous motivation compared to their academic counterparts. Willis (1976) identified this as a dominant pattern in his classic study, and Vogt (2017) found similar tendencies among young men on male-dominated vocational tracks. However, it is when this finding is seen in relation to the attitudes of pupils on academic tracks that an interesting contrast emerges.

The contrast between vocational and academic tracks becomes particularly evident when the vocational pupils’ relationship to practical work is compared with the academic pupils’ situation. Focus groups conducted at vocational tracks highlight a stronger emphasis on practical activities as positive and less time-consuming than sitting still and doing homework. Pupils on both tracks are concerned with learning, yet the learning culture on vocational tracks appears to be less competitive.

Pupils on academic tracks assign lower status to vocational tracks. In other words, the question of status between the two is a key aspect of their track preference. The status dynamic becomes evident when academic- and vocational-track pupils share the perception of the latter being “hated on”. This underlines that both groups interpret the academic-track pupils as occupying the “top” position in the status hierarchy. Vocational pupils defer to the academic pupils’ condescending attitudes. Thus, within a school system where the institutional situation of the academic and vocational tracks is more similar than ever, general academic education continues to be perceived as superior, and theoretical subjects are regarded as more prestigious than practically oriented ones.

Previous research has identified a lack of status associated with vocational tracks (Billett et al. 2022; Johansen 2020; Myklebust 2018; Reay 2020; Reisel and Seehuus 2023). Reay (2020, p. 411) claims that this might lead to a situation where education’s losers may feel they do not deserve the same level of recognition as the highly educated, as has, indeed, been demonstrated in the deferential attitudes of the vocational students in these data. Her article discusses the narrative of meritocracy that permeates British education in general, not only reflecting on the relationship between VET and academic tracks. However, the findings in this article display something similar to her analysis—namely, that the current relation between the two tracks creates a hierarchy of “winners” (academic track) and “losers” (vocational tracks). Internationally, there is a shortage of people in vocational positions, which has been partly ascribed to the lack of desirability of these jobs, resulting in a “university degree boom” (Billett et al. 2022). These findings therefore provide an insight into some of the reasons behind this global trend and deepen the understanding of widespread meritocratic ideals (Reay 2020).

Most of the pupils who took part in this project describe academic tracks with high admission grade requirements as high-status. The interviewees enrolled in these high-status tracks also frequently use the term “smart” when describing the pupils at their own schools. This perception is clearly related to grades. Having good grades from lower secondary school is associated with being “smart”. If a pupil is “smart”, he or she chooses the academic track because they are often told they are “too smart” for vocational education. Billett (2020) argues that grade-based school choice reinforces the status dominance of theory-oriented tracks while undermining the intrinsic value of practically oriented fields. Consequently, the view that the academic pathway is superior to a vocational qualification is reproduced.

A combination of theoretical and practical subjects has previously been identified in research as beneficial for education (Brunstad 2020; Rönnerman 2018). However, what we observe today is a Norwegian school system increasingly developed on the premises of theoretical subjects. The status difference is further enhanced by the fact that it is primarily grades in theoretical subjects that determine which educational tracks pupils are eligible to enter. Grade-based school selection is a principle that benefits certain academic tracks: It is within these tracks that admission is the most competitive, leading to a cluster of so-called “elite schools” with particularly high entry requirements (Halvorsen and Ljunggren 2021; Pedersen et al. 2018). As a result, theoretical subjects acquire an even greater value within a regime where theory-based grades from lower secondary school determine pupils’ educational trajectories at the upper secondary level. This “theoretical precedence” in Norwegian society supports a situation where it is legitimised among academic track pupils to openly and rudely express condescending views on vocational education. This is essentially an example of the Matthew effect, where those with good grades in theoretical subjects from lower secondary school are rewarded for it. Practical and creative subjects are increasingly rare in the Norwegian educational system at lower levels (Brunstad 2020) and not rewarded to the same extent during the intake process for the upper secondary school level. This finding highlights a pivotal argument made by Reay (2020)—namely, that academic pursuits are more often rewarded within educational systems and designed for middle- and upper-class people. This is clearly seen in the case of the transition from lower secondary to upper secondary school in Norway, as demonstrated in this article. As Reay (2020, p. 408) puts it, the fixation on testing and assessment disguised as “meritocracy” might create “hierarchies of worth among children, dividing them into winners and losers on the basis of perceived ability”.

The Norwegian media frequently publish celebratory stories about pupils with high grade point averages, and lists of the most competitive schools for admission are regularly featured in Norwegian newspapers (Krystad 2024; Lillelien and Lom 2025; Riisnæs 2019). Far less is written about vocational pupils and their tracks, which, again, demonstrates how vocational education tends to be perceived as a “second-tier option” for pupils who are not academically strong rather than as an attractive choice in its own right.

The current status differences between vocational and academic tracks contribute to a tension between two different types of ambitiousness and interests, regarding either academic or practical tasks. Moreover, it allows for an openly rude and vicious narrative about vocational students and their future occupations to prevail in both the public discourse and among pupils in upper secondary school. A deferential attitude to their fellow academic pupils among those on vocational tracks is part of the picture that has its roots in the public acceptance of meritocratic ideals.