Inquiry into the Role of Institutes of TAFE
Submissions

This document has been scanned from the original printed submission. It may contain some errors

Submission 65

DRYSDALE INSTITUTE OF TAFE

11 November 1997

INQUIRY INTO THE APPROPRIATE ROLES OF INSTITUTES OF

TECHNICAL AND FURTHER EDUCATION

The appropriate roles of institutes of technical and further education

The traditional roles of TAFE institutes is under great change throughout Australia due to the implementation of national reforms in vocational education and training. The open competitive training market which is now emerging through the policy of User Choice, means that TAFE institutes will no longer have a monopoly on vocational training. These changes may be viewed by some sectors of TAFE as a threat to the quality of the training system, however, change is upon us and it is important that people within TAFE recognise the changes taking place and make the most of the opportunities which these changes present.

Regardless of the training reforms and the consequent changes to the development of training curricula, the economics of industry prevalent in Australia today dictates that much of the training required by industry will depend upon the individual economic situations of employers. As a high percentage of Australian companies are of the small to medium size, their training needs will be dictated by their ability to employ labour at a cost that will maintain their individual competitiveness. This is becoming particularly evident in the comparisons of employment in regard to apprentices and trainees. In recent times there has been a decrease across Australia in the numbers of apprentices being employed, which has been off-set by a similar increase in the number of trainees being employed under the traineeship system. This appears to indicate that employers are seeking less expensive employment options without a long term commitment.

If vocational education and training is to become more responsive to the requirements of the labour market, it is important that we review our current systems and at the same time establish a future role for institutes of technical and further education within the training system. Perhaps consideration could be given to the public funded systems in providing initial entry level training for the majority of people entering into the workforce, before employers are expected to assume responsibility for the further training of their employees, in cooperation with both public and privately funded providers. An example of this training format already exists in Tasmania in the meat industry, which has been extremely well accepted by all stakeholders. A further proposal is currently before the State Training Authority in regard to other areas of contracted training which are serviced by the Drysdale Institute of TAFE in Tasmania as a statewide institute responsible for food, hospitality and tourism training. The philosophy behind this approach is to change the existing system of contracted apprenticeship training to provide employers with an independently selected workforce which is pre-trained prior to entering the apprenticeship system to provide better cost effectiveness, quality training and higher retention rates than is currently the situation. It is a case of using the existing public funds for apprenticeship training in a more effective manner.

In order to maintain and improve the quality of the training, which is currently being provided to give both younger people and more mature participants a broad skill base, it is important that training does not become narrowly focused to meet the needs of individual employers' operations. There is a threat that if this were to be the case, that many people will only be trained for specific tasks which relate to the employer's product output. The economics of running a business in today's climate, also encourages employers to only train people to a level of skills commensurate with a minimum wage level which remunerates that skill.

In opening the competitive training market to both private and public providers including secondary schools and SkillShare trainers, there is the distinct possibility that TAFE institutes could inherit the training which is too expensive, too long, too capital and labour intensive.

It is envisaged in the future that the roles of TAFE institutes will be influenced by collaborative partnerships developing between TAFE, industry and other providers of training. During the next few years it is likely that as the training market evolves, that a variety of innovative arrangements will emerge. TAFE administrators will need to assess the changing training needs and become pro-active in initiating these collaborative partnerships, in order that the institutes will be able to survive and flourish in the new training markets. It is also a time when both the Commonwealth and state governments need to monitor the changing training arrangements and encourage these partnerships, rather than force unacceptable changes upon the various public and private providers of training.

Within the changing roles of the various training providers, the government needs to review the role of secondary schools, SkillShare and other government funded providers of training, in order that a competitive market does not emerge at the expense of training quality, and create confusion in the minds of both the participants within the training programs and employers who are expected to employ labour from these training programs.

The extent to which those roles should overlap with universities

The emergence of the new training market has already convinced the more forward thinking universities in Australia that the time has come for them to explore collaborative links with the TAFE system, in order to build on the expertise of TAFE graduates and the success which they currently enjoy in the world of commercial employment. There are already examples of graduates of advanced diploma courses at level 6 of the Australian Qualifications Framework obtaining formal articulation to university degree courses, in order to complete their skills training at a higher tertiary level. Whilst TAFE institutes will be able to provide training from levels 1 - 6 of the Australian Qualifications Framework, it should be understood that many secondary schools throughout Australia are now able to provide training up to level 2 of the AQF and that universities are able to provide programs for people in diploma and advanced diploma at levels 5 and 6. The only levels of the AQF which are still the absolute responsibility of TAFE are levels 3 and 4.

However, it is more likely that most of the levels 5 and 6 programs will be delivered by TAFE. Articulation arrangements between TAFE advanced diploma level 6 and universities is supported with universities providing direct transfer for TAFE student graduates from the diploma programs. As TAFE institutes are now required to give automatic credit transfer to secondary school graduates entering into TAFE programs, it should also mean that TAFE graduates have formal articulation transfer to university degrees to support the policy of a seamless system of education from school to university.

Back to top