Chapter 1 continued
Broadening national adult education and training policy
The vocational/non-vocational divide, and the associated focus on accredited
training at the neglect of other important aspects of adult education
and training, has restricted the effectiveness of national policy in promoting
lifelong learning and a learning society.
In the Committee's view, national policy should affirm the fundamental
importance of lifelong learning and of an integrated approach to
education and training in which technical skills and general cognitive
and social capacities are developed and nurtured together. The policy
should acknowledge the mutual responsibilities of individuals and education
and training structures in meeting the nation's economic and social goals.
There must be a clear commitment to equity and to the use of targeted
subsidies so that participation in education and training, and the achievement
of outcomes, is enjoyed by all Australians. There must also be a clear
statement of the responsibilities of the State and Commonwealth governments
to provide support for the achievement of the desired education and training
goals.
The principles which should be observed are those which express a commitment
to a broad and inclusive approach to education and training funding support
by the Commonwealth government. No significant cohort of learners, nor
any one sector of education and training, should find itself totally excluded
from access to public funds. The Committee also advocates a principle
of support for educational infrastructure, which encourages sharing of
facilities and resources, with support from public funds where necessary.
Once such infrastructure is secured, the attributes of local provision,
ownership of and responsiveness to individual and community needs can
flourish. Adequate infrastructure also means that providers are able to
account properly for the disbursement of public funds, and to maintain
appropriate standards of data collection and reporting of activity.
The integration of the values and principles outlined above into the
policy process and associated funding arrangements does not necessarily
require an increase in the level of Commonwealth government funds appropriated
for education and training. The application of these values and principles
is intended to enhance the productivity of Australia's education and training
effort by ensuring a judicious investment of finite funds across the different
types of post-school education and training provision.
In the Committee's view, a commitment to lifelong learning requires a
policy framework which reflects, promotes and sustains the values implicit
in that commitment. In short, the practical effect of national policy
and funding arrangements must be the equitable participation in education
and training by all adult Australians, throughout life.
The first requirement is a statement of the government's unequivocal
commitment to the concept of lifelong learning and the creation of a learning
society. The whole notion of what is or may be `work related learning'
needs to undergo a radical shift, and policymakers must abandon the assumption
that learning for life and learning for work can be easily distinguished.
Instead they should adopt the view that there is a multiplicity of economic
and social benefits that governments should responsibly seek to bring
about for their citizens, and that these will necessarily require opportunities
for all types of learning.
On this account, the Committee considers that the dual policies of
a National ACE policy and a National VET Policy should be brought together
in a way which articulates the commitment to lifelong learning and values
the multiplicity of learning opportunities and diversity of provision
which characterise a learning society.
The Committee suggests the working title National Adult Community
and Vocational Education and Training (NACVET)
Policy. The NACVET Policy should cover all aspects of education
and training outside the school and university domains. The policies covering
all three domains must together constitute a coherent national approach
to education.
At the national level, to implement, monitor and fund this reconceptualised
NACVET Policy, should be the National Adult Community and Vocational
Education and Training Authority (NACVETA). It should integrate
the functions currently undertaken by ANTA and the MCEETYA ACE Taskforce
and re-orient its practices towards the building of an organisational
culture dedicated to lifelong learning.
The Committee does not envisage the establishment of a major new entity,
but rather the modification of ANTA to accommodate the ACE sector. This
is not to subsume ACE under VET, but to bring ACE alongside VET in a manner
which retains the distinctive features and functions of ACE. The new Authority
will need to adjust ANTA's funding and operational priorities accordingly.
The modified Authority will also require changes to the constitution of
its Board membership to ensure the presence of an adequate ACE perspective.
The administration and funding practices of the new Authority should
be accountable to the Commonwealth government, and in exercising its role
as monitor, supporter and adviser on national education and training policy
NACVETA should report annually to the Parliament. This report should constitute
the prime accountability document for the expenditure of Commonwealth
funds on education and training.
The implementation of the NACVET Policy, and the disbursement of Commonwealth
government funds, should be effected through Adult Community and
Vocational Education and Training (ACVET) Agreements between the
Commonwealth government, States and Territories. Such Agreements would
require States and Territories to develop an Adult Community and
Vocational Education and Training (ACVET) Profile which embodied,
and expressed in action, the principles and values of the National Policy,
namely a commitment to lifelong learning and the provision of a multiplicity
of learning opportunities through a diverse range of providers (government,
private, and community-based).
Providers contributing to the achievement of the goals set out in the
Agreements and Profiles would be eligible for Commonwealth government
funds on the condition that they are registered. Registration would be
granted by the States' and Territories' Education and Training Authorities
on the grounds of the provider's capacity to deliver programs at particular
standards of quality. These standards of quality should be set by the
relevant industry, professional or educational associations, depending
on the nature of the education and training provision being delivered.
It is suggested that three broad categories of provider should be registered
as follows:
Category A. Specific Industry Education & Training
Category B. Non-specific Industry Education & Training
Category C. General Education & Training
The Committee considers that any funding mechanism seeking to realise
a `thorough-going commitment to lifelong learning' must legitimise and
support not just one realm of adult education and training. The proposed
registration scheme is intended to facilitate access to Commonwealth government
funds by providers across the spectrum of education and training provision.
States will be expected to observe 'maintenance of effort' requirements.
The proposed scheme is not too far from the existing categories which
already operate in the State Training Profiles. Each of the categories
should be funded at different levels, primarily according to capital and
infrastructure requirements, and the recurrent costs of the programs delivered,
taking into account the obligations of providers to meet industry standards
where relevant. The scheme would allow for a grading of public funds across
the range of adult education and training programs. Providers may register
under one or more categories.
Registration criteria should be centred around the quality of the
provider as assessed by the relevant recognised professional, industry
or educational association. For example, community-based education providers
seeking Category C registration from a State Education and Training Authority
might have to meet the relevant competency-based standards for such providers
set by the Australian Association of Adult and Community Education (AAACE).
The Committee acknowledges that the details of these kinds of proposals
will require careful working through. However, there are already changes
in the operation of the Australian Recognition Framework which shift the
focus towards registration of providers and away from the accreditation
of courses. The Committee's suggestions are consistent with this development.
Because of the urgent need to address the problem of non-participation
in adult education and training by certain disadvantaged groups, a National
ACVET Equity Fund should be established to encourages providers
to design and deliver services to non-participating groups.
The fundamental issue remains that of establishing an unequivocal
commitment from governments to the creation of a learning society through
the promotion of lifelong learning. Once such a commitment has been
secured, national education and training policy, and funding mechanisms,
can be adapted accordingly. The key to lifelong learning is to optimise
the effectiveness of Australia's education and training providers, no
matter what sector they belong to, and to encourage and support the participation
of adult Australiansparticularly adults in the target equity groups.
The Committee RECOMMENDS that the Commonwealth government:
- make an unequivocal commitment to the concept of lifelong learning
and the promotion of a learning society; and
- imbue its education policies and associated funding mechanisms
with the values and principles of lifelong learning for all Australians.
|
| The Committee RECOMMENDS that the Commonwealth government
bring together the National ACE Policy and National VET Policy to
establish an integrated National Adult Community and Vocational
Education and Training (NACVET)
Policy giving effect to the commitment to lifelong learning.
|
| The Committee RECOMMENDS that the new NACVET Authority
report annually to the Australian Parliament on the achievement of
policy outcomes. |
| The Committee RECOMMENDS that, in order to implement,
monitor and fund the new NACVET Policy, the Commonwealth
government restructure ANTA to establish the National Adult
Community and Vocational Education and Training Authority (NACVETA).
The membership of the Authority's Board will be modified to ensure
that an adequate ACE perspective is available to the Authority, and
the way in which the Authority distributes its funds should reflect
its revised charter. |
| The Committee RECOMMENDS that the Commonwealth government
negotiate with the States and Territories a set of Adult Community
and Vocational Education and Training (ACVET) Agreements.
These Agreements will require each State and Territory to develop
an Adult Community and Vocational Education and Training (ACVET)
Profile consistent with the National Policy. |
The Committee RECOMMENDS that:
- in order to be eligible for Commonwealth funds, providers be
registered as a quality provider with a State or Territory Education
and Training Authority;
- registration be based on providers meeting standards of quality
set by the relevant industry, professional or educational association;
- three broad categories of provider be registered as follows:
Category A. Specific Industry Education & Training
Category B. Non-specific Industry Education & Training
Category C. General Education & Training
|
| The Committee RECOMMENDS that a National ACVET
Equity Fund be established under the new NACVET Authority
to target groups currently under-represented in education and training. |