Change and continuity in adult education and training

It’s difficult to imagine where the 1.6 million individuals participating in a vocational training program each year in Australian would be without the TAFE (Tertiary and Further Education) system that accommodates three quarters of them. Where would individuals who may not meet other academic tertiary institutions’ entry requirements, or perhaps not find suitable educational programs offered by these institutions, be able to receive ongoing tertiary eduction? Surprisingly, as integral as TAFE training is in Australian education today, this has not always been the case.

Prior to the 1970s education in Australia provided limited opportunities for individuals who may not have fit the mould for traditional academic education and technical training. This is especially true for the large number of people from non-English speaking backgrounds, the poor, Aboriginals, and to some degree women; all of which may be marginalised from the educational institutions that may not see them as intellectually able, or culturally privileged enough to partake in formal educational programs within their such institutions. Furthermore, it could be said that these potentially disadvantaged others may not find a sense of belonging or purpose within the courses, programs, delivery and assessment methods employed at academic institutions, and would rather opt for a much more vocational experience that provided and enhanced employable skills in a given industry. It was obvious to some that there was a demand, and need, for a Government supported, equitable, and accredited system for accommodating more and more individuals that were slipping into this educational gap.

The evolution of TAFE in Australia seems to stem directly from a report by the Whitlam Government’s appointed Australian Committee on Technical and Further Education (ACOTAFE), chaired by Myer Kangan. The Kangan Committee was formed based on the surprising discovery by The Federal Minister for Education that 400,000 students did not fall under that category of any existing educational Commissions at the time. The resulting Kangan Report (1974) is viewed by Connell (1993) and Schofield (1994) as the first major step toward the ubiquitous national system that we are familiar with today.

Connell (1993) provides a comprehensive and detailed analysis of the development of the TAFE sector in Australia; so much so that it might be mistaken for a documentary script; that identifies the Kangan Report as being an important milestone in the development of technical education in Australia. The report had several key recommendations, including shifting focus of TAFE away from a manpower orientation toward an “educational and social emphasis” (Kangan 1974, cited by Connell 1993, p. 325). The Committee also regarded recurrent education and equitable access for all people, regardless of levels of formal education, as a core concept of TAFE. This recommendation was particularly important to accommodate the large growing number of marginalised individuals not accommodated by any other educational sector. The report also called for a greater focus on skills that would result in employability and match community interests and needs. TAFE began to react more directly to the demands of individuals and the needs industry.

By 1977 TAFE was formally accepted as a recognised member of the tertiary education sector, alongside CAEs (Colleges of Advanced Education) and universities. However Connell reminds us that TAFE, despite being formally considered tertiary, was not recognised as ‘higher-education’. The need to lessen the distinction of TAFE, CAEs and universities, and to better accommodate the growing number of untrained school leavers, was repeatedly highlighted by other committees, including the 1977 Williams Committee. The Williams Committee also recommended increases to the range and flexibility of TAFE programs, and improving the quality of teaching.

The TAFE sector was a rapidly developing field that allowed for more flexibility than the other tertiary bodies and through sustained reform and Government support TAFE enrolments continued to rise. It could clearly be seen that the system formally accommodating part-time trade training was being accepted as a mainstream form of education, with over one million participants each year by the mid-1980s.

Connell clearly held the Kangan report in high regard, as did Schofield (1994) when she described it to be “the first of what will be many major revolutions in thinking about technical and further education in Australia” (Schofield 1994, p. 57). She discusses how, even after 20 years, the revolutionary report persists in technical education so strongly that its ideals are not easily stamped out by the training reform agenda of the mid 1990s. Schofield interprets the outcomes of the Kangan Report as providing three important things; a paradigm for what TAFE education should be; programs, backed by a Federal budget; processes to provide a level of professional commitment; and declares that “It is in the combination of paradigm, programs and processes that the Kangan legacy lies” (Schofield, 1994, p. 58).

Kangan’s paradigm for education found it’s strength from its philosophical base that conceived ‘technical training’ as something that incorporated the individuals’ freedom to choose their vocational training programs, and reject the notion of being limited to choices based on industry needs. This focus was seen as the training reform agenda as marginalising industry needs, and thus rendering TAFE training increasingly irrelevant to businesses. Schofield argues that a post-Kangan history of TAFE is yet to reach compatibility, though more recent Government initiatives draw us closer. This is evident in DEST’s (Department of Education Science and Training) 2004-2010 vocational strategy slogan “VET works for Australian Businesses. VET Works for people. VET works for communities.” (DEST 2004). Further Government strategies; such as the PETP (Priority Education and Training Program) which provides training funding based on industry, equitable, innovation and pre-apprenticeships; and the formation of State and National Industry Training Advisory Bodies as described by Smith & Keating (2003, p. 58) demonstrate that the Government is working closely with industry needs to cover industry skills gaps in vocational training without shifting the focus too far from individual and community needs.

Despite the measurable successes of TAFE, represented by the volume of training delivered to the millions of students moving through the system each year; the continued Government funding; the range of programs provided that allow equitable access to otherwise unrepresented communities; the system is not without its criticisms. One of the most common conjectures surrounds the quality of ‘competency-based’ training delivered by TAFEs as opposed to traditional ‘excellence-based’ academic education. Seddon (1993/4) attempts to articulate the broader sense of this distinction by examining the foundations of both sides of the debate in more detail and hypothesise probable futures.

The educational factions, according to Seddon, seem to comprise chiefly of two polarised enclaves of what can be regarded as valuable and meaningful outcomes - ‘education’ and ‘training’. The two factions each look after their own ‘aristocracies’ and demonstrate relative incompatibility with each other. According to Seddon both institutions “disadvantaged those who fell beyond the frame of academic learning and the skilled male worker” (Seddon 1993/4, p. 44). This led to large communities that were unrepresented in education. This ‘liberal meritocracy’ also reinforces the segregation and further polarisation between education and training by raising academic education to an elite status that defines training as only suitable for individuals who have failed academically. Seddon further explains that siding with either enclave only reinforces the polarisation, and that “it is diversity, self determination and genuine participation which is absent from the alternatives on offer” (Seddon 1993/4, p. 9).

Education in Australia may always be affected by change and reform as we continue to strive towards a universal approach to education, whether it is under a binarism of ‘education and training’, or a more unified approach that sees less distinction of tertiary education institutions. It is now evident that in any educational environment there will be a continuing need for a flexible system that can adapt to the requirements of industry groups, by reacting to market and industry needs, whilst accommodating community groups that might otherwise be marginalised. The TAFE system has evolved to fill these gaps and demands from various stakeholders guided by advisory committees, and provided continued Government support continues, will continue to develop to better suit these growing needs. Failing the unlikely emergence of a unilateral educational system it will be increasing important for the TAFE sector to continually focus on improving existing practices, such as those mandated in the Australian Qualifications and Training Framework (AQTF 2007), to stay en par with other tertiary institutions and be taken seriously as a member of higher education to benefit the interests of business, communities and individuals in Australia’s future.

References

Commonwealth of Australia (2007) AQTF 2007. Essential Standards for Registration. Retrieved August 1st, 2007, from http://www.training.com.au/documents/aqtf2k7_ess-std-reg_final2.pdf

D.E.S.T. (2004) Australia’s National Strategy for Vocational Education and Training 2004-2010. Retrieved August 1st, 2007, from
http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/98206EC7-3B9A-4A58-991F-4F28010BF825/16445/national_strategy.pdf

NCVER (2004) Australian Vocational Education and Training Statistics. Students and Courses Survey 2004. Retrieved August 1st, 2007, from http://www.ncver.edu.au/statistics/vet/ann04/sum04/sum04.html

PETP (2007) 2007 Priority Education and Training Program. Retrieved August 1st, 2007, from http://gftp.otte.vic.gov.au/gftp/PETP/2007/RTOadvice2007PETP.pdf

Smith E., Keating J. (1997). Making sense of training reform and competency-based training (pp. 57-72). Wentworth Falls: Social Science Press.

Schofield K. (1994) ‘The Clash of the Titans’ in Kangan 20 Tears On,
Kearns P. & Hall W. (eds) (pp.57-77). National Centre for Vocational Education.