When the Netherlands developed a national system of vocational education at the end of the 19th century, it was a direct answer to obvious shortcomings in the technical and trade professions (De Jonge, 1968). It concentrated on training craftsmen for the traditional, mainly agrarian economy, and technicians for the new, industrial economy. The training being offered was closely related to actual professional practices. In the first place, there was a very stable occupational structure, in which professional knowledge and skills did not become obsolete quickly. This, in turn, made it possible that education was -and remained - up-to-date. Secondly, almost all teachers were also experienced craftsmen, who only started teaching after a long career. The teachers learned actual professional practices through direct experience. In addition, students were also frequently familiar with actual practice, because the occupational structure was so stable: they knew exactly for which profession they were being trained. A stable occupational structure, a clear occupational orientation by the students, and teachers with extensive firsthand work experience ensured that vocational education was a powerful learning environment. For this reason, a dual system had hardly any added value. A consequence is that the apprenticeship system in the Netherlands - as opposed to almost all surrounding countries - had a lower status and fewer students than full-time education (Teerling & Bijveld, 1982).