Search Results

In the 1987-88 Budget, the Australian Commonwealth Government announced that it would delay the start of the next funding triennium for higher education to 1989. This paper explains more fully the reasons for the decision in the context of the Government’s longer-term plans for development of the higher education system. The Government is determined that the education and training system play a central role in responding to major economic challenges facing the nation. The paper suggests that Australia can no longer rely on established practices and institutional arrangements to meet these needs. Australia’s universities and colleges of advanced education (CAEs) are the main source of highly educated people necessary to continued economic growth. Research activities within higher education are also vital. For these reasons, the Government is strongly committed to the further development of the national higher education system. The paper outlines the reasons why the Government believes that continuing with current funding arrangements for higher education would not be in the best long-term interests of either the system itself or of the nation in general. The government will therefore embark on a process of policy development and consultation leading to the establishment of a new set of arrangements for Commonwealth support of higher education from the beginning of 1989. In the meantime, the Government has decided to treat 1988 as a year outside the normal triennial funding process. The paper contains an overview of the higher education system and the Government’s plans. Show less

This publication sets out the national strategy for vocational education and training (VET) in Australia. It is the intended direction agreed by the governments, and the sum of a number of specific strategies designed to deliver responsive, quality, accessible and efficient VET. The strategy is designed as a framework which will evolve and be periodically reviewed. Implementation will be through existing mechanisms, including State and Territory training profiles, national industry VET plans and performance agreements. The strategy emphasises greater responsiveness, enhanced quality, improved accessibility and increased efficiency. Show less

The Joint Steering Committee [JSC] was charged with the responsibility of ensuring that nationally recognised training products within the vocational education and training (VET) sector are flexible and responsive to changing industry, business and individual needs and workplace practices. Improving outcomes for clients included work on improving the design of units of competency, Training Packages, VET qualifications, accredited courses, credit systems and recognition arrangements to support reforms for a more client and demand driven system. In particular, the JSC was to develop a policy framework to enable VET qualifications and products to: meet the needs of businesses and industry; and equip individuals with broadly based skills and knowledge. The project was completed through a two stage consultative process. In the first stage a draft consultation paper [indexed at TD/TNC 97.119] was developed and then refined through consultation with key peak body stakeholders. A paper was also commissioned from the National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER) to support the consultation process, ‘Competence and competency based training: what the literature says’ [indexed at TD/TNC 96.06], and should be read in conjunction with this report. In the second stage, feedback on the issues and options presented in the refined consultation paper was sought from VET stakeholders more broadly through a second round of targeted consultations, public workshops in each State and Territory and a written submission process. Based on the outcomes of the national consultations, the Joint Steering Committee proposes the following policy framework to improve the flexibility and responsiveness of the VET system.

Excerpts from publication. Show less

This Senate Committee report is the culmination of three years of close scrutiny of vocational education and training (VET) issues by senators covering education policy areas. It provides a plan for addressing the concerns about the adequacies of quality assurance in VET. The Committee’s broad inquiry into VET has covered many technical and complex issues facing the sector. The extensive terms of reference addressed by the Committee involved a detailed consideration of concerns held by the wide range of stakeholders in the national VET structure. The terms of reference cover the effectiveness of the VET sector in developing the educational skills of the Australian people and the skills formation and productivity of the Australian workforce, including: (1) an evaluation of the place of the New Apprenticeships scheme within the national priorities set for Australia’s vocational education system and the appropriateness of those priorities; (2) an evaluation of claims that the key objectives of the original New Apprenticeships scheme, as agreed by the states and territories, are not being met; (3) an assessment of the quality of provision of technical and further education (TAFE) and private providers in the delivery of nationally recognised and non-recognised VET services and programs; (4) an examination of the impact on the quality and accessibility of VET resulting from the policy of growth through efficiencies and user choice in VET; (5) an evaluation of the provision of Commonwealth and state employers’ subsidies; (6) an evaluation of the growth, breadth, effectiveness and future provision of vocational education in schools; and (7) an assessment of the consistency, validity and accessibility of statistical information on the performance of national VET systems, especially relating to apprenticeships and traineeships. The report contains 28 recommendations to the government. These go to the heart of restoring quality in VET, beginning with a renegotiation of VET objectives with major participants in the training network, but focusing mainly on strengthening institutional arrangements which ensure compliance with quality control processes.

The overview and recommendations are indexed at TD/TNC 63.458. The Government response to the report is indexed at TD/TNC 66.506. Show less

A review of Australia’s higher education system was undertaken by the Commonwealth Government in 2002. The Review began with the release of an overview paper entitled ‘Higher education at the crossroads’ in April 2002 (indexed at TD/TNC 71.381). The paper described some of the characteristics of the higher education sector and the challenges facing it. It raised a number of questions for debate and called for submissions on the issues raised. There were 355 submissions from a variety of stakeholders in response to the overview paper. This document, based on the outcomes of the review process, presents the Government’s blueprint for reform. It proposes increased Commonwealth investment of $1.5 billion over four years linked to progressively introduced reforms in areas such as teaching, workplace productivity, governance, student financing, research, cross sectoral collaboration and quality. Show less

In 2012, the Australian Government lifted previously imposed limits on the funding of bachelor-degree students at public universities. This new system was called ‘demand driven’ because it allowed universities to respond to student demand and allowed more students to benefit from higher education. On 12 November 2013 the Minister for Education appointed a review panel to look at and make recommendations in relation to the demand driven funding arrangements. The panel looked at the impacts of the demand driven system and whether it is increasing participation, improving access to students from poorer backgrounds and rural and regional areas, and meeting the skill needs of the economy. It explored whether there were any adverse impacts on quality and considered the long term sustainability of the system.

The report found that public universities have responded well to changes under the demand driven system and improved access for all students. It found the new system has allowed universities to be more responsive to student needs, driven innovation and lifted quality. The reviewers made 19 findings and 17 recommendations, including extending the demand driven system to diplomas, advanced diplomas and associate degrees, and to private universities and non-university higher education providers such as TAFEs. The reviewers believe that extending the demand driven system will expand opportunities for students, and lead to further innovation in courses and modes of delivery, and in the quality of teaching and graduates.

Abstract from publisher’s website. Show less

TAFE Futures is a national inquiry into the future of the public TAFE system. The Inquiry was commissioned by the Australian Education Union (AEU) in 2006 to determine how TAFE can best operate in the future to ensure it is meeting the skills and education needs of its students, employers and local communities. The key findings of the Inquiry include: TAFE is working well with students and employers, indicating high levels of satisfaction at the service provided; two-thirds of employers want training done through TAFE; the federal government remains largely hostile to TAFE, continuing to favour policy responses to skills shortages that marginalise TAFE and providing funding opportunities that favour private providers; courses and services are being cut due to lack of funds; significant re-thinking is required about some of the national directions for training packages and the application of aspects of competency-based training; fees and charges are a barrier to the participation of many in the community who need general education and training; the TAFE workforce is one of the most casualised in the economy and these high levels of casualisation are counterproductive in maintaining a quality and accessible provider; and the squeeze on resources has eroded TAFE's commitment to access, equity and social justice. The contents are: The TAFE Futures Inquiry: a dialogue about the future with those who make TAFE work; Part A: The TAFE story and the challenges of continuity and change; Part B: What Australians say about TAFE: a summary of national consultations; Part C: What Australians say about TAFE: a summary of submissions; Part D: New futures for TAFE: renewal and change. Included as appendices are: Current research on partnerships in VET and TAFE: opportunities for the future of TAFE; Terms of reference for the TAFE Future Inquiry; Bibliography. Show less

At a fundamental level, the role of tertiary education is increasingly being questioned, revealing deep uncertainty about its broader purpose and value. The authors of this volume suggest that the impetus for a rethinking of many of the traditional features of the tertiary education system in Australia is already present, with concerns for, among other things, the transparency of information for prospective students, student retention and outcomes under the demand-driven policy settings, the lack of research-industry engagement, and the overall value of tertiary education to the economy and society. The volume begins with a broad-brush overview of the current tertiary sector and the issues it is facing. The chapters then offer ideas for transforming Australian tertiary education. Each is grounded in current issues or trends but goes beyond present thinking to propose ways in which policy and practice might make major advances. The volume has been purposefully framed around tertiary education, rather than higher education, since a key decision for policy makers is how best to resolve current funding and regulatory anomalies created by the inefficiencies and complexities of the current system architecture.

The contents are as follows: Foreword / Richard James and Leo Goedegebuure; Futures for Australian tertiary education: developing an integrated, coherent policy vision / Sarah French, Paula Kelly and Richard James; A framework for differentiation / Leo Goedegebuure, Vin Massaro, Lynn Meek and Alan Pettigrew; Funding an expanded tertiary system: designing a coherent financing architecture / Gwilym Croucher, Jonathan Chew and Peter Noonan; Organising, leading and managing 21st century universities / Geoff Sharrock; To what degree?: alternative micro-credentialing in a digital age / Sandra Milligan and Gregor Kennedy; Engaging university teachers in design thinking / Kristine Elliott and Jason M. Lodge; Analytics of what?: negotiating the seduction of big data and learning analytics / Gregor Kennedy, Linda Corrin and Paula de Barba; Advancing equity in the Australian higher education system / Matthew Brett and Andrew Harvey; Universities and the evolving graduate labour market / Andrew Norton; Standards and quality in Australian higher education / Pip Pattison; Vocational education and the innovation agenda: towards the creation of effective innovation eco-systems / Leo Goedegebuure and Ruth Schubert; Internationalisation of Australian higher education: where for from here? / Douglas Proctor and Sophie Arkoudis; Redesigning the higher education workforce: a new architecture / Elizabeth Bare and Emmaline Bexley.

Edited excerpts from publication. Show less

This position paper reports the findings and recommendations for a new governance framework for the national training system. The paper is the culmination of an extensive review and consultations across all jurisdictions and engagement with key stakeholders, and supports a more aligned and streamlined governance model for an integrated tertiary sector. Three overarching messages emerged during consultations. Firstly, submissions urged a reinvigorated partnership or compact between governments and industry if the foundations of the governance system are to be sound. Stakeholders were also very clear about the need for a shared national policy agenda on workforce and economic development, using the knowledge we gain from our industry partners to inform investment in skills linked to labour market needs, sustainable employment and long term careers. A toughened and more consistent national framework for regulation to deliver the highest quality outcomes and enhanced performance by the system was a further theme. The paper identifies six underpinning functions of the national training system’s future governance and architecture and Skills Australia proposes these as the framework on which a more cohesive and streamlined system can be established. The functions are: (1) leading a unified vision for skills to support a national economy; (2) providing strategic advice and the evidence for reform; (3) investing wisely and effectively in skills and workforce development; (4) regulating and ensuring quality services and products; (5) using information to inform decision making, quality and client choice; and (6) providing training services that meet needs.

Excerpts from publication.

The consultation paper is indexed at TD/TNC 95.916. Show less

This Senate Committee report is based on the premise that employers, unions and educators agree that Australia is facing some serious skills shortfalls which are set to worsen over the next decade without appropriate action. The first chapter gives the background to the report, the terms of reference of the enquiry and an overview of the issues. Chapter two looks at skills shortfalls and future skill needs, concluding that there is a necessity for the development of a more integrated approach to collection and dissemination of information on current and future skill needs. Chapter three looks at whether current policy is promoting the development of both high level and intermediate level skills, the nexus between the labour market and skill formation and the Job Network. The chapter concludes that the present approach to skill formation is not well suited to labour market conditions. Chapter four focuses on the current vocational education and training (VET) policy settings, funding arrangements and institutional framework for meeting Australia’s current funding levels and future skill needs. Of concern is that the current funding models and reporting and accountability functions of the VET system are not compatible with the objectives of development of a high skill workforce, promotion of innovation and the development of a quality, responsive system that can provide diverse responses to skill needs. Chapter five suggests that multiple training pathways are important to cater for diversity in both the individual and the work environment and examines some of the current arrangements for providing individuals and industries with seamless pathways for skill formation. The final chapter has two main themes: (1) the role of industry in identifying and responding to the skill needs of its workforce; and (2) the need for a policy framework that promotes greater industry responsibility for training its workforce, touching briefly on the need for consultative arrangements within the training system to include the full range of stakeholders. Show less