Standing Committee on Employment, Education
and Workplace Relations
This document has been scanned from the original printed submission.
It may contain some errors
Submission 22
Jim Wellsmore
INQUIRY INTO THE APPROPRIATE ROLES OF INSTITUTES OF TECHNICAL AND FURTHER
EDUCATION
Submission to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Employment,
Education and Training
22/10/97
Summary
While this submission relies on a perspective from within the university
sector, it begins from the assertion that there inevitably is a great
deal of overlap between the activities of institutes of TAFE and those
of universities. Much of the planning of post-school education in Australia
has revolved around a hierarchical view of the relationship between TAFE
and universities. More recently a view has emerged that it is appropriate
and inevitable that the provision of "generalist" education
will overlap with that of "vocational" skilling.
This seems to be understood readily enough by the many people who move
between universities and TAFE, enrolling first in one sector and then
the other. However, it is important that the relationship between TAFE
and universities be understood further before attempts are made at a greater
blurring of the distinctions lest this have unintended negative impacts.
It is important to understand that some of the overlap which already
exists between TAFE and universities is being driven by the impact of
financial pressures resulting from government policies and the resultant
operation of commercial markets. Likewise, TAFE institutes have a commercially
driven interest to expand into the offering of based qualifications equivalent
to university level degrees.
The abolition of the earlier binary divide in higher education was achieved
through competitive reforms and the creation of new markets within higher
education. It is important to point out that the consequences of the introduction
of competition has been very damaging both to many of the universities
themselves and to the performance of their educational mission. Yet, it
is expected that many of the arguments for the reform or abolition of
the structural separation between universities and TAFE institutes will
rely on assertions about the benefits of competitive efficiencies and
educational markets.
The long established view of the hierarchy between the two sectors no
longer can be relied on as the basis for changes to the roles of higher
education and TAFE. An attempt to move TAFE "up" in order more
closely to replicate the role of universities may be counterproductive.
Perceptions of status and the impact of the established view of post-compulsory
education and training have a created a hierarchy, a vertical stratification
of institutions. In terms of the exercise of choice by students, however,
there also is evidence that students perceive a more horizontal stratification.
There is data which indicates strongly that many people are putting into
practice the concept of lifelong learning. Rather than TAFE moving "up"
to replicate some of the roles of universities, there may be a clear benefit
in universities expanding their role to include more specific vocational
skilling. If these were to be made subject to HECS-style regimes this
would mitigate the financial barriers to retraining and open up greater
possibilities for students to pursue add-on vocational skilling.
Whilst perceptions of status have resulted in historically different
treatment in policy, at present the clearest delineation between the TAFE
and university sectors stems from general funding and rules about student
financing. In moving to redefine the overlapping roles of TAFE and higher
education, the key question for governments must be how and for what each
of these two systems is funded for. Without such a policy framework the
marketplace will enforce its own system of differentiation between institutions.
The experience with the Unified National System in higher education is
that the abolition of the binary divide as a step towards enhanced competition
actually has had the effect of insulating a number of institutions against
challenges from those "below". The key issue is whether bringing
TAFE into more direct competition with universities, for example through
their offering degree level generalist qualifications, will simply increase
the vertical differentiation by status. This will see the exercise of
student choice become more directed towards the attainment of status rather
than of complementary or add-on education.
Introduction
This submission concentrates largely on the second of the terms of reference
given to the Standing Committee with respect to its Inquiry Into the
Appropriate Roles of Institutes of Technical and Further Education. Detailed
knowledge of the TAFE system lies beyond the expertise of this author
and, in any event, it is assumed others more knowledgeable will provide
the relevant important information to the Committee.
This submission, then, concentrates on the extent to which the activities
of TAFE institutes do and should overlap with the activities of universities.
In particular, it makes significant points about the likely impact on
universities of an expanded role for TAFE institutes and suggests, rather,
that an alternative course of action might be to explore an expanded role
for universities in the provision of vocational education.
No specific reference is made to vocational education and training (VET)
although the submission is informed by the fact that this is provided
through a number of avenues other than TAFE. AN outcome sought by some
submissions to the Inquiry might seek a greater role for TAFE in the area
of VET but this in itself is unlikely to impact on universities.
The overlap
While this submission relies on a perspective from within the university
sector, it begins from the assertion that there inevitably is a
great deal of overlap between the activities of institutes of TAFE and
those of universities. Much of the planning of post-school education in
Australia has revolved around a hierarchical view of the relationship
between TAFE and universities. With the binary divide within higher education
(that between the former CAEs and the universities) having been abolished
through the Dawkins' "reforms" of the late 80s there has to
a large extent been a new divide created in postcompulsory education
which supposedly separates TAFE institutes on the one hand and universities
on the other. Perceptions of status, educational quality, differences
in n-fission and even general levels of resourcing all have arisen from
this.
The debate as to the validity of these perceptions and the distinctions
between "generalist" or "liberal" education and "vocational
training" broke out into the public domain very early in the life
of the present West Review of higher education (see Armitage,1997; Coorey
& Ellicot,1997; and Coorey,1997). Yet, as pointed out by the authors
of an important recent report :
"While the boundaries between 'general' and 'vocational' education
overlap there is a distinction to be made between general
education and vocationally specific education (and) TAFE and higher
education share responsibility for both kinds of education" (NBEET,
1996:8).
There are key differences between universities and the TAFE sector. Given
that much of the provision of VET takes place outside traditionally recognised
centres of learning . perhaps universities regard this area of activity
within TAFE as being distinct from the concerns of higher education. On
the other hand, it is clear that some forms of knowledge and skills are
created as readily in generalist education as in vocational training as
in generalist education. So there are key similarities between the two
sectors.
As the authors argue, it is not easy to draw a firm distinction between
these educational missions. This seems to be understood readily enough
by the many people who move between universities and TAFE, enrolling first
in one sector and then the other. It is interesting to view this movement
in the context of the commonly held perceptions of TAFE relative to universities.
More than half of those students who move between the two sectors first
were enrolled in a university before commencing their enrolment in a TAFE
institute (NBEET. 1996: 1 0).
So, the university and TAFE sectors overlap with each other not only
in the roles they fill but in the actual provision of educational programs.
The relationship between these two sectors already has outgrown a rigid
structural divide. However, it is important that the relationship be understood
further before attempts are made at a greater blurring of the distinctions
between TAFE and universities. The concern must be that a further driving
together of these distinct systems does not have unintended negative impacts.
Commercial factors
It is important to understand that some of the overlap which already
exists between TAFE and universities is being driven by the operation
of markets. The specific impact of reductions in per student funding to
higher education has combined with more general policy settings on the
part of the Commonwealth to increase not only the reliance of universities
on private sources of revenue but also the proportion of total income
derived from such sources (see DEET, 1996:12; Marginson, 1997:9). Thus,
the commercialisation of educational programs, even the outright privatisation
of areas of institutions (see Wellsmore, 1997:5), is regarded as vital
to the relative "success" of various universities.
In this competitive commercial environment the pressures are strong for
universities to move more formally into areas of vocational training.
Beyond the measure of vocational skilling inherent in university education
(as discussed above), individual institutions are pushing into areas of
VET, industry certifications and so on in pursuit of student markets and
revenue. For example, Macquarie University offers on a fee-paying basis
to non-award students such programs as the Certificate of Superannuation
Management and the Professional Development Program in Conveyancing.
Through its commercial relationship with the Sydney Institute of Business
and Technology the University also is committed to the delivery of an
Advanced Certificate program, equivalent to a TAFE qualification,
in areas like accounting, business studies, computing and marketing.
A similar environment has been created in the technical and further education
sector which in many areas has been commercialised to a greater extent
than universities. Again this has arisen through a combination of funding
mechanisms and broad policy settings. Further blurring the popularly perceived
distinction between the two systems, then, has been the commercially driven
interest for TAFE to expand into the offering of based qualifications
equivalent to university level degrees.
The abolition of the earlier binary divide in higher education was achieved
through competitive reforms and the creation of new markets within higher
education (see Marginson, 1997). This will be taken up in greater detail
later in this submission. It is enough to point out, however, that the
consequences of the introduction of competition, unintended or unstated,
were very damaging both to many of the universities themselves and to
the performance of their educational mission.
Yet, it is expected that many of the arguments for the reform or abolition
of the structural separation between universities and TAFE institutes
will rely on assertions about the benefits of competitive efficiencies
and educational markets. It is not appropriate for this submission to
comment on the educational benefits which might arise from a less rigid
barrier between university level and nonuniversity level qualifications
(for example see NBEET,1996). However, it seems important to draw attention
to the point that in order to achieve such benefits a method might be
found which relies more on educational planning than competitive economic
behaviour.
The significance of credit transfer
While student markets have become central to the provision of higher
education and have attracted universities to the provision, on a fee-paying
basis, of TAFE level qualifications, this has not long been the driving
force for greater articulation. The operation of credit transfer has become
a much debated educational issue since the initiation of the Dawkins'
"reforms". Credit transfer was presented within those reforms
as an equity measure over Within those reforms improved credit transfer
arrangements were viewed as much a mechanism for improved equity outcomes
within education as a means for improved efficiency (Dawkins, 1987:22,38).
That view of credit transfer and articulation relied on a hierarchical
relationship between the higher education and TAFE sectors. The existence
of a more complex relationship is evidenced by the fact that most people
who have moved from one sector to the other first were enrolled in a university.
The study which produced those figures showed evidence for a broad acceptance
on the part of students (irrespective of which sector they first had been
enrolled in) of universities playing an important role in the formation
of generic skills (NBEET,1996:29). Whilst staff were more divided, again
there was a broad acceptance that TAFE institutions generally do not have
as a focus the forination of generic skills.
The import of these findings is that the long established view of the
hierarchy between the two sectors no longer can be relied on as the basis
for changes to the roles of higher education and TAFE. To the extent that
student demand can and does shape educational delivery, it is significant
that students themselves have demonstrated the value of generic learning
being supplemented by specific vocational skills. Further application
of the inter-sectoral hierarchy, in effect an attempt to move TAFE "up"
in order more closely to replicate the role of universities, may be counterproductive
as a result.
Movement between sectors
Student demand is not a simple construction, there are many factors which
influence educational choice. Although, in an educational system increasingly
dominated by user-pays mechanisms, competition tends more and more to
be economic in character, as Marginson (1997) explains in essence students
are competing for positional advantage. Whilst avoiding any discourse
about the educational ramifications of this construction it can be said
that within the present systems of post-compulsory education students
at least have a clear picture of what type of programs are offered, what
they can expect within those programs and in which institutions to find
them.
Perceptions of status and the impact of the established view of post-compulsory
education and training have a created a hierarchy, a vertical stratification
of institutions. In terms of the exercise of choice, however, there also
is evidence that students perceive a more horizontal stratification. The
extent of movement between the sectors of TAFE and university indicates
that, rather than moving upwards from lower to higher status, students
are interested in gaining an appropriate mixture of skills and qualifications.
The significant factor in student movement between the sectors is that
those initially enrolled in a university later move to TAFE in
order to gain particular skills and those initially enrolled in a TAFE
institution proceed to a university in order to gain a qualification (NBEET,
1996:15). Student demand for these different aspects of post-compulsory
education is underpinned further by the fact that most transferees previously
have completed at least one qualification in the sector where they initially
enrolled (NBEET, 1996:76-77). The NBEET study also indicates that graduates
do not necessarily move immediately from one sector to the other.
This data is a strong indicator that many people are putting into practice
the concept of lifelong learning. It has been argued elsewhere, and is
accepted for the purposes of this submission, that the real barrier to
repeated participation in education, whether as a continuous experience
or as retraining, is an economic one, particularly in the form of user-pays
mechanisms. As noted above, universities have begun to pursue TAFE level
vocational programs for commercial reasons - they are fees based. Likewise,
many of the programs offered by TAFE institutes are fees based. However,
rather than TAFE moving "up" to replicate some of the roles
of universities, there may be a clear benefit in universities expanding
their role to include more specific vocational skilling. If these were
to be made subject to HECS-style regimes broadly applying to undergraduate
study in universities this would mitigate the financial barriers for retraining
and open up greater possibilities for students to pursue add-on vocational
skilling.
The impact of competition
Whilst perceptions of status have resulted in historically different
treatment in policy, at present the clearest delineation between the TAFE
and university sectors stems from general funding and rules about student
financing. This submission anticipates that the driving force for a greater
overlap between the two sectors will be competitive commercial pressures
as a smokescreen for lower financial commitments from government. Such
a course could only have the effect of increasing the importance of status
to the performance of each sector and the individual institutions which
comprise them.
The authors of the NBEET report stressed that numerous studies indicate
the importance of context specific knowledge in the use of expert skills.
The point was made that this highlights the importance of discipline based
learning because:
"(it is) not that the formation of knowledge can be substituted
for the formation of generic
competencies, but that each needs the other" (1996:19-20).
However, in moving to redefine the overlapping roles of TAFE and higher
education, the key question for governments must be how and for what each
of these two systems is funded for. If, for the purposes of decisions
about policy and resourcing, TAFE institutes are to regarded as indistinguishable
from universities it is clear that the marketplace will enforce its own
system of differentiation between institutions. Since perceptions about
status will continue to influence the operation of the market, greater
direct competition between universities and institutes will replace the
constraints of structure with the limitations of less formal inefficiencies.
How well will a group of hybrid TAFE-universities be regarded? How will
they be expected to compete with the established universities? How will
students differentiate between the vocational focus of the TAFE system
and the more generalist character of the universities? These very same
questions arose with the abolition of the previous binary divide in higher
education yet have never been successfully answered. Ten years after the
abolition of the CAE sector the fundamental problem remains of institutions
attempting to sustain the research essential to degree level teaching
when they receive so little research funding in comparison to the older
universities.
The data on student movement does not suggest there is any relative shortage
of degree level generalist programs within post-school education. It is
the mixed generalist/vocational courses offered by TAFE that are experiencing
the greater demand. The NBEET study authors noted a concern that the movement
of university graduates to TAFE might have the effect of crowding out
school leaver TAFE entrants (1996:1 1). There should be considerable concern
at the validity of a strategy to introduce further competitive pressures
to higher education specifically, and post-school education generally,
if this is to be implemented simply through TAFE institutes moving toward
a greater level of provision of degree level programs.
The experience with the Unified National System in higher education is
that the abolition of the binary divide as a step towards enhanced competition
actually has had the effect of insulating a number of institutions against
challenges from those "below" (see Marginson,1997:13). Rather
than meritocratic reforms, which would have introduced the best aspects
of the CAE sector directly to all universities, competitive reform reinforced
the relative position of the stronger and higher status institutions at
the expense of the rest.
In considering the effect of reform on students and their educational
choices the key issue is whether bringing TAFE into more direct competition
with universities, for example through offering degree level generalist
qualifications, will simply increase the vertical distance across which
institutions are spread. Since, in any case, the significant competition
is between students on the basis of positional advantage, will post-compulsory
education become more stratified and the relatively elite position of
universities be strengthened further?
All this has financial and resource implications for TAFE institutions
in a scenario of direct competition with universities. It also poses significant
dangers for a university sector already stratified by perceptions of status
should the introduction of TAFE institutes further widen the gap between
the "elite" and the remainder of the system. The impact on students
will be a muddling of their educational choices. The present horizontal
aspect of student movement will be replaced by a more vertical competition
for status. The educational market, as opposed to that based on status,
will work less effectively because it will become less clear where students
can find particular vocational skilling as distinct from generalist education
and vice versa. There will be an increase in the number of institutions
identified in the market place as second and even third class and the
exercise of student choice will become more directed towards the attainment
of status rather than complementary or add-on education.
Conclusion
The type of education provided by TAFE institutes has a value which is
not only intrinsic but is recognised by students, including graduates
from universities. Almost paradoxically but as a result of government
policy settings, an increasing factor in the overlap between TAFE and
universities is the viability of providing specifically vocational skills
on a commercial basis. The extension of the activities of the university
sector to include more TAFE level vocational education could, if supported
by appropriate changes to Commonwealth policy, see these provided on a
HECS-liable basis and thus have the effect of increasing access. On the
other hand, bringing TAFE institutes into more direct competition with
universities, since this likely will mean more widespread commercial offerings
of degree level programs, seems to threaten significant detrimental effects
on both sectors.
References
Armitage, C. 1997, "Review chief rejects vocational courses"
in The Australian 16/1/97 p. I
Coorey, M. 1997, "Double-dip students prove TAFE and uni go together"
in The Australian 17/1/97 p.2
Coorey, M. & Ellicot, J. 1997, "West outdated on training,
say academics" in The Australian 16/1/97 p.4
Dawkins, J. 1987, Higher Education: A 12olicy discussion pal2er,
AGPS
DEET 1996, "Diversity in Australian Higher Education Institutions,
1994" in Higher Education Series Report No.26, Higher
Education Division
Marginson, S. 1997, "Competition and contestability in
Australian higher education, 1987-1997' in Australian Universities'
Review, vol. 40. no. I
NBEET 1996, Chan2ina Context. Movin2 Skills : Generic Skills in the
Context of Credit Transfer and the Reco2nition of Prior Learning,
National Board of Employment Education and Training, May
Wellsmore, J. 1997, "Markets in Higher Education : The Balance
Between Public and Private Investment", submitted to the Journal
of Australian Political EcongDy October 1997
Back to top