SEVENTH AND FINAL
HIGHER EDUCATION DISCUSSION PAPER RELEASED

19  August 2002 Min 151/02

In looking at how the Australian higher education sector can best serve the nation there is a need to consider how to maximise access to the available higher education opportunities for Australians.

This necessarily involves looking at pathways from the Vocational Education and Training sector.

The final paper in the series to inform the Review of Higher Education examines the growing interface between the higher education and vocational education and training sectors.

The paper, Varieties of Learning: The Interface between Higher Education and Vocational Education and Training describes the two sectors, the factors shaping the relationship and the nature of the interface. It then considers a range of issues canvassed in submissions to the Review before concluding with some suggestions for ways forward to strengthen inter-sectoral links. It does so with full acknowledgement of the respective roles and responsibilities of the Commonwealth and State and Territory governments.

The paper considers a range of issues including movements between sectors and credit transfer arrangements, articulation and joint courses, the role of dual-sector institutions and multi-sector campuses, infrastructure sharing and research collaboration and future demand in each of the sectors.

The paper also raises issues concerning collaboration between the sectors to improve the efficient use of resources, especially capital resources, and to provide students with opportunities to undertake learning in both sectors to meet their diverse career and personal development needs.

Each sector has its own distinct mission and the paper does not propose any changes to these.

Nor does the paper address broader issues associated with Australia’s post-compulsory education and training system.

This paper follows the overview paper, Higher Education at the Crossroads, and a series of issues papers to encourage debate about the future of Australian higher education. Other papers have canvassed issues relating to the quality of teaching and learning, specialisation and regional engagement, Indigenous participation in higher education, financing higher education, and governance arrangements and workplace relations in universities.

These papers have been informed by discussions with stakeholders, past reviews, and submissions to the overview paper - which number more than 350.

Further submissions on any of the issues raised are welcome. These will be received until 13 September 2002.

The first in a number of consultative forums for the Review was held by the Review Secretariat in Darwin last week. These meetings will continue over the coming weeks in a range of centres across Australia.

A two-day seminar will be held towards the end of the year to consider the range of issues and options raised during the Review process. A package of policy measures will then be developed for the Government’s consideration.

I hope that towards the end of this process we can support a revived policy framework that will place Australian higher education onto a secure footing into the future.

The paper, Varieties of Learning, will be launched at 9am at Committee Room 1R3, Parliament House Canberra and will be available on the following site: www.dest.gov.au/crossroads

Previous discussion papers can also be accessed on the site.

A summary of the issues raised in the paper is attached.

Copies of the full report are also available by contacting my Canberra Office on 02 6277 7460.

• The higher education and VET sectors have distinct but complementary roles. For higher education the primary focus is on the pursuit, preservation and transmission of knowledge. While employment-oriented learning outcomes are a legitimate concern of higher education, these tend to be more generic and generalist in nature, equipping graduates for a range of economic and social contributions.
• VET programmes range from basic adult education to New Apprenticeships, and advanced technical and business diplomas.
• The VET sector has grown considerably in recent years, from around 990 000 students in 1991 to 1.76 million in 2001, representing 13.1 per cent of Australia's working age population.
• Higher education and VET vary considerably in their funding, governance and administrative regimes.
• A number of factors are driving an increased interface between the two sectors:
• First, rapid technological change, globalisation and the growth in knowledge-intensive industries are generating demand for different sets of skills.
• Secondly, the growing trend to lifelong learning is likely to see the growth of a more diverse student body with a range of needs straddling the higher education and vocational education and training sectors.
• Thirdly, there are national and several State-based strategies for secondary schooling that could see a significant increase in the number of young people seeking post-school education and training.
• Fourthly, there are efficiencies in cooperation and collaboration.

• Recent research challenges the traditional view of student movement between the sectors as a one-way trip up the qualifications hierarchy. In fact, a study suggested that the number of VET clients in Australia with a completed university award outnumbered university undergraduate commencers with some prior TAFE experience by a factor of at least three between 1991 and 1997.

• There remains no national system of credit transfer between VET and the higher education sector.
• Most universities have policies on credit transfer which outline availability of credit or advanced standing to students for prior study providing they gain admission to a higher education course.
• Growth in the number of private providers of VET is leading to an expansion of credit transfer arrangements between this segment of the VET sector and the higher education sector.
• The different education and assessment arrangements in VET and university can present problems in assessing a student’s prior university studies for equivalence with VET just as it does for assessment of a VET student’s prior studies for equivalence with higher education.

• Providers from one sector are not prohibited from offering a qualification assigned to the other, provided they can meet accreditation and other requirements.
• In submissions to the Review, it is noted that Australian universities have moved into VET in both the local and the international market, and offer certificate-level courses, diplomas, advanced diplomas and vocational degrees in traditional VET areas.
• There are many kinds of courses involving some degree of collaboration between TAFE and university. The articulation model generally involves a sequential pathway between qualifications in VET and higher education, allowing students to progress from one qualification to the next, and offering multiple entry and exit points.
• Dual sector universities represent one model of institutional collaboration between the sectors. These institutions include a TAFE and a higher education division and co-exist within one institution with one overarching university council to manage the overall affairs of the institution, and separate boards responsible for higher education and TAFE programmes.
• Several innovative models of shared campuses have developed, varying according to ownership and management of infrastructure and services; degree of integration of courses offered to students; and use of physical co-location and/or electronic networks to articulate courses and links to industry.
• There are clearly benefits to all partners in sharing facilities and equipment, particularly in regional areas where student numbers cannot support separate infrastructure. While shared campuses lend themselves particularly to infrastructure sharing, there are a number of other forms of co-location and cooperation involving some degree of infrastructure sharing. Some institutions may derive benefits from adjoining campuses, with each party remaining autonomous and independent entities operating in their own right.

• The interface between the sectors has developed by-and-large in the absence of major policies or incentives at national level to strengthen collaboration and cooperation, although there have been some initiatives to foster credit transfer and joint capital developments.
• A threshold issue is whether there are benefits in a more strategic and coordinated approach.
• As a large country with a small population, Australia might be better served by a more strategically focussed approach to cooperation and concentration of resources. A more strategic approach may also improve the opportunities for Australians to gain access to higher education. This could be done without imposing constraints on either sector or rewriting their respective missions and purposes.
• While there have been significant advances in recent years to improve credit transfer arrangements between the VET and higher education sectors, more needs to be done. Streamlined credit transfer processes will go some way to breaking down the systemic barriers to educational pathways, and maximise the quality of students’ learning.
• There remains the need to improve the amount and quality of information to VET graduates about opportunities for higher education study.
• A number of commentators argue that differences in funding and reporting regimes make it extremely difficult to develop dual sector programmes as funding, administration and reporting arrangements must be negotiated and resolved each time.
• Limited financial incentives exist for collaborative activity, in particular to compensate institutions for the time and resources that must be invested to set up cross-sectoral awards and review them to maintain the currency of the component parts.
• Higher Education at the Crossroads highlighted an anomaly whereby two students who graduate from a university with the same qualification might pay significantly different amounts because of the different pathways they took to the bachelor degree.
• Of concern from a policy perspective is whether access to education is being affected by the mandatory payment of upfront fees in TAFE, contrasting with the availability of HECS loans in higher education.
• Some submissions see introduction of a HECS scheme or similar for TAFE courses that articulate with university degrees as a valuable step forward. Others argue against this.
• There are calls for development of funding and reporting models that overcome the difficulties which dual sector universities currently face.
• The potential benefits of multi-sector partnerships include: more cost-effective provision of education and training, particularly in regional areas; increased opportunities for articulation and development of joint award programmes; facilitated movement of students between the sectors; and broadened horizons for students from both sectors. Some consider that the shared campus model has advantages over the dual sector university model in that the partners retain their separate identities
• Some submissions argue for incentives to be provided to encourage universities, TAFE institutions and other stakeholders to enter into partnerships to extend higher education provision into rural communities.
• Several stakeholders argue for a clear delineation between the sectors on the basis of qualifications offered and that this delineation should reflect the different missions of the two sectors. Others argue that there should be a range of qualifications that should be offered by both sectors and that the key issue is not the level of qualification but the needs of the students and the labour market.
• There is also much debate about use of the term ‘associate degree’ and which sectors should be offering diploma level qualifications and graduate diploma and certificate qualifications. Resolution of these issues is appropriately one that needs the input of all parties including the universities, other higher education providers, VET providers and State/Territory governments.
• With participation in post compulsory education standing at high levels in Australia both historically and in relation to international comparisons, there is scope for debate about the likelihood and nature of any future increases in demand.

• There are a number of models of joint courses that are meeting particular student needs, and consideration could be given to ways in which they could be expanded.
• One model involves VET courses which are designed to provide credit towards a degree while also establishing an exit point for those students who decide that they do not wish to proceed to higher education.
• Several submissions to this Review note the benefits of a segmented approach to undergraduate study by dividing it into two articulated stages, with each stage lasting for two years (2 + 2 model). The first stage, leading to a diploma, would be offered by a VET provider and the second stage, leading to a degree, would be offered by a university.
• Alternative approaches would be to develop a national pilot programme around a 1+2 structure or a 2+1 structure. The first stage would be an approved higher education programme delivered by a VET provider. Full credit would be awarded to students moving into university. Under either option a diploma could be offered after two years.
• For reasons of equity and access there are strong arguments for income-contingent loans to be made available to students participating in any programme that might be established.
• Another form of joint course is where a university and a VET provider develop related courses in which students enrol concurrently, achieve some cross-credit and graduate with both a degree and VET qualification in a shorter period.
• Another possibility is to explore ways in which VET students’ achievements can be recognised by a State or national level tertiary entrance rank so they can compete on an equal basis with school-leavers.
• Several submissions call for the Commonwealth to work with State and Territory governments to map and promote learning pathways so potential students can access up-to-date information on options available to them.

A number of possible options have been raised in relation to the issues in the paper. While not an exhaustive list, these questions have been included for consideration and discussion:

• Should a national pilot programme be developed to expand the number and coverage of articulated courses involving VET providers and universities?
• If such a programme were to be developed, should students have access to income-contingent loans?
• Should income-contingent loans be available to all VET students undertaking accredited higher education courses offered by VET providers?
• Should trials of graded assessments in TAFE be expanded?
• Should a study be conducted that explores ways in which VET students’ achievements can be recognised in tertiary entry scores?
• Should the Commonwealth and State/Territory governments jointly examine ways to increase information available to students on VET to university credit transfer arrangements and articulation options?
• Should incentives be considered for institutions that demonstrate good practice in admission and credit transfer?
• Should an evaluation of multi-sector campuses be sponsored by Commonwealth and State/Territory governments prior to consideration of a national strategy for any expansion of such arrangements?

Copyright  |  Disclaimer  |  Privacy Statement