SUBMISSION TO THE HIGHER EDUCATION REVIEW
Association of TAFE Institutes
Background
The Association of TAFE Institutes is the peak employer body representing the Councils of all Victorian TAFE Institutes. Our Mission is to facilitate an environment in which Members can deliver world class vocational education and training. Within this role we provide an information service to our Members, and represent them in the industrial relations arena. We also provide through conferences and seminars, opportunities for professional development of Institute Council Members and executive management across the system. The Association also takes an active liaison role on behalf of its Members with State and Federal Government departments and Ministers on key issues.
The competitive environment in which providers of vocational education and training (VET) operate when coupled with the differences that exist between state systems, have served to prevent an effective national voice to represent the sector. The Association is concerned to ensure that the views of TAFE Institutes in Victoria are considered by the Review Committee.
Focus of this submission
This submission seeks to specifically address the reporting criterion of the Review Committee which states:
"In developing its recommendations, the Government expects that the review committee will pay particular attention to the need to ensure that ... the interfaces between the higher education sector and the vocational education and schools sectors operate efficiently and effectively..."
It is to the issue of the interface between the sectors that this submission will focus.
At the outset, we acknowledge the magnitude of the task set for the Review Committee and the short reporting timeline and we look forward to the Committee’s report being the catalyst for further examination of the issues in greater detail. We also acknowledge that in the context of the overall review, consideration and analysis of this issue may not be as expansive as we might have otherwise preferred and as a result may be limited to broad statements of principle.
While we do not believe that it is the domain of the Review Committee to consider the VET sector in detail, we would like to ensure that any change to the sector consequent to the findings of the Committee only occurs against a background of informed deliberation and accurate debate. To this end our submission outlines some of the issues which we consider would add value to the review.
The relationship between Higher Education and VET
The educational system in Australia, from primary to tertiary is complex and multi-faceted, with each sector having its own discrete qualities. When considering the articulation of students along the many educational pathways currently available, it is critical to recognise the intrinsic qualities of each option and that the smooth transition between them does not and should not lead one to conclude that integration of the sectors will in all cases achieve the optimum outcome for the relative principal stakeholders in each.
This Association believes the relationship between the higher education and VET sectors is of paramount importance to the educational excellence of the nation and its people. Any objective which promotes closer ties between the two sectors should be supported by encouraging providers with sufficient community of interest to form strong, practical strategic alliances and partnerships.
Clearly, as in any successful partnership, the benefits extended through closer co-operation, while facilitating an opportunity for each to maximise their own business opportunities, will at the end of the day result in the nation having the most to gain but only if the quality of education being delivered is relevant to the clients’ need without sacrificing quality standards of educational excellence.
Different sectors - different outcomes
Clearly, the higher education and VET sectors are different. There are differences in their end products, differences in the manner and cost of delivery, and differences in the skills required of the educators. Plainly speaking, they do things differently.
Vocational education and training is competency based, customer focussed, practical and applied, while higher education is generally theory-based. The emphasis in VET is on skilling, and enhancing the employability prospects of graduates.
TAFE (and VET generally) in Victoria prides itself on its flexibility and responsiveness - a result no doubt of a well developed system of multiple entry and exit points for students. Students in TAFE obtain recognition and credit for completion of modules (as opposed to completion of an entire course). Students can undertake the specific parts of a course that are relevant to them, receive appropriate recognition and credit transfer to other institutes thereby enabling them to return to further studies and undertake other modules at a later time. University students on the other hand receive recognition only on completion of a full course.
The importance of the interface
To facilitate and encourage an environment of continuous learning which provides students with a smooth transition between the sectors of their choice, the effectiveness of interface between them assumes a critical dimension. Any arrangement in which users are able to move freely between higher education and VET must lead to an increase in the level of skill and competency of the workforce. The consequential enhanced mobility and employability of graduates from both sectors, and the subsequent flow-on of economic benefits to the nation must all contribute to reducing the current level of unemployment.
An effective interface is an integral part of any system which meets its customers’ needs. We believe that this is best achieved through strategic alliances and co-operation between Higher Education and VET providers, rather than integrating the two sectors into one.
In the competitive environment in which Victorian TAFE Institutes are operating, they are successfully forging alliances with other educational providers including universities and schools as well as with the wider community of employment brokers and major industry. The diversity of the market, and the participants who work within it must be able to work in a complementary manner to meet the needs of the end-users.
We believe that providers should focus on co-operative arrangements with any number of players in the training market, recognising that they will meet as competitors in other market spheres. Relationships of this type are critical for providers to achieve commercial independence and competitive effectiveness.
Further, such an approach seeks to facilitate collaborative ‘ownership’ of the end product by more than one single provider and an acceptance by the stakeholders in the education and training system, of all those who have established a legitimate role in the market.
There are many industries whose end product comes about as a result of an amalgam of effort and contribution by any number of participants. Similar opportunities may be open to universities and VET providers in the delivery of their products in the most efficient and effective manner possible for the betterment of our students.
Values of vocational education and training
There are undoubtedly, features of the VET sector which have played a significant role in the development of Australia’s skill base and there can be no argument that vocational education and training does have an equally significant role to play in the future and perhaps no more so than in Victoria. We are proud to put on the public record that Victoria has had for several years, a unique state training system, one which is now being embraced by the other States. A system of autonomous VET providers, both public and private, all with intrinsic characteristics and inherent qualities of commercial and educational value to their clients, which we believe would be lost in a world where universities are seeking to absorb VET within the ‘academic’ culture of their faculties. While this may be a model worth considering in the future, universities and schools face a very steep learning curve in the immediate future in coping with industry standards and accreditation, adapting to flexible competency-based training, and an application of the values of VET, other than for short term capitalisation on its popular appeal, and the attraction of significant funds.
The Association recently commissioned the National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER) to undertake a research project to identify naturally occurring qualities present in VET in Victoria that are of value to our clients and to comment on those factors which distinguish VET from other learning mediums, as well as looking for areas of improvement. The project involved interviews with representatives from urban and non-urban Victoria, from a range of public and private providers, enterprises within industry, policy makers, unions and employer and industry groups.
We would be pleased to provide to the Committee a copy of the completed report when it is available however as a preliminary comment, the draft report has outlined some of the key characteristics of VET in Victoria being as follows -
- VET is flexible
VET is regarded as being flexible in terms of delivery mode, content and structure. For example, a TAFE Institute as part of its standard package of products might structure a course based on a combination of correspondence programs with short on-campus intensive sessions. Alternatively, it could deliver on-site training to industry for a forklift driver between Christmas and New Year on very short notice at a time which minimises any disruption to the client’s production schedules. Universities could not realistically be thought of as flexible and responsive institutions, and numerous examples could be drawn upon to illustrate some of the sector’s rigidities, for example, enrolment procedures. Victoria’s TAFE institutes operate 51 weeks of the year and several operate 7 days a week. This coupled with the fact that VET providers will go to the client, rather than requiring the client to come to them. There is no body of evidence to indicate such flexibility in the Higher Education sector.While finding VET flexible, the report also found that VET must become even more flexible to further meet client demands and more importantly, Victoria’s TAFE institutes are readily responding to the challenge.
- VET is applied and practical
This feature is especially appreciated by those already in the workplace. VET is perceived as placing a greater emphasis on the practical and less on the historical perspectives which lie behind the development of applied thought. There is a danger that some of the practical nature of VET programs if taught by universities will be lost as they become integrated into the university ‘stream’ of thinking.It was also raised by interviewees that VET providers do provide targeted programs at the level required by the client, rather than relying upon ‘off the shelf’ pre-packaged programmes at an ‘intermediate’ or ‘advanced’ level as one might reasonably expect to be offered by a large university. Fitting in courses with existing higher education faculty profiles will inhibit the ability of a university to be flexible. VET is responsive to industry, rather than being curriculum outcome driven.
- VET is competitive
The VET sector in Victoria is actively competing internally within Victoria, as well as externally interstate state and internationally. In recent years, changes in government policy have resulted in competitive tendering between public and private providers for public funds. Because of its history of autonomous institutes and their increasing commercial independence, Victoria’s TAFE system is well placed to respond to the introduction of principles of User Choice where public funds are allocated to the chosen provider of the employer or trainee.- VET is capable of reacting to local needs
The research found that an important strength of the VET system is the open-door policy, which means being open to suggestions or requests from companies both small and large. This characteristic is closely related to the flexibility feature described above.- VET is less institutionalised and bureaucratic than other parts of the education system.
This is an important distinction. Because universities are more rigid in their structure and operations, they are less capable of meeting the needs of customers across the range of service provision, including the method of course delivery, course content and course structure.
Why the intrinsic qualities of the VET sector should be preserved
The natural identity of the VET sector needs to be preserved because of its strong market value to the nation. A system which does not retain the discrete qualities of our existing sectors runs the risk of becoming homogenised. Such a system has the potential to distort the signals being sent by the market when identifying its needs. This may occur for any number of reasons, including those being driven by the Institutions own commercial imperatives, but it is also possible that market signals are not accurately read or translated into meeting the training need because of the sheer bulk and remoteness of the institutionalised bureaucracy existing in these larger organisations. As a result, market responsiveness is inhibited and outcomes that are ultimately delivered are in danger of being those dictated by the provider and not the client.
Another factor mitigating against the proliferation of integration of the sectors is related to fiscal and educational integrity. An integrated system implies a single public source of funding. But of course, such an educational system would embrace all of the discrete cultures and values of each of the sectors its absorbs. In turn, as pressure points occur within the market, or within the institutions own political structure, situations could well emerge which give rise to cross subsidisation of sectorial activity (for example, funds intended for VET may be used by the provider for the delivery of higher education to maximise a perceived need). Similarly, a provider may ignore niche markets in say, the VET sector, to provide services in other sectors. With clearly defined sectors operating to meet the needs of their clients, the market will be assured of relevance of product, responsiveness in meeting its needs and a level of fiscal responsibility and public accountability unaffected by cross subsidisation.
Other issues for consideration
Some of the characteristics of VET identified by the NCVER as being of value to our clients were outlined earlier. It is clear that universities are turning their attention away from their traditional academic base toward the vocational training market for purely commercially pragmatic reasons. They are actively seeking to entice VET students with ‘associate degrees’ while clinging steadfastly to the belief that universities have an unassailable right to retain intellectual exclusivity to offer ‘degree’ subjects, notwithstanding the many vocational degree level disciplines being offered through vocational education and training.
We believe that what Australia needs is not an increase in university graduates at the expense of VET graduates. This country needs a greater skills base founded on increased competency and real, demonstrable work skills that are capable of being of immediate benefit to Australian industry and the wider community. All this stands in jeopardy if the lure of a degree overshadows the real worth of a more suitable course from a VET provider, designed, targeted and delivered to those with a specific and immediate need in a flexible, relevant and competitive manner.
The Association considers that while closer interaction between the university and VET sectors should be encouraged, this need not and should not be perceived as being best achieved through a proliferation of multi-sector institutions or universities delivering ‘Associate degrees’ in vocational education and training. There are many fine examples of co-operation between Victoria’s TAFE institutes and the university sector, particularly in regional Victoria where degree students attend part of their course at the regional TAFE institute. The benefits to the teaching staff and the utilisation of capital resources of each are obvious. However of greater value is the obviation of the need for students to travel away from their home town, often at considerable expense to their family or the community to undertake this component of their education. Moving outside of the immediate sphere of the student, there is the fact that the cost of provision to the State is less when these sorts of arrangements are in place and are being delivered through TAFE.
This aspect of the integrated model is admirable, permitting students to access a potentially vast array of educational opportunities. Provided that these options are structured with multiple entry and exit points, students and industry can be assured of departures from these courses predicated on success rather than excessively high drop out rates when students do not possess the tenacity or capacity to withstand the rigours of an unrealistically structured single entry/exit type of course.
Conclusion
The VET sector has features worth preserving, and for the reasons described above, the Association believes that the multi-sectorial environment is not the optimal mode of delivery for the VET product. It is our genuine belief that the identity of VET and its widespread accessibility to all parts of the community across Australia would be placed at risk if integration of the sectors is accepted as a natural consequence of ‘smoothing the interface’.