|
Jacqui Elson-Green
MORE needs to be done to address VET change management and staff
development needs, according to a new study which specifically investigated
what is required to achieve an integrated, national VET system.
At the national level, a more strategic approach to staff development
and change management is required, the study says, including the
advocacy of efficacious change management methods, identifying priority
areas of staff development and providing more information about
how to achieve a national VET system.
The study, titled High-skilled High-performing VET, was
carried out by educational consultant John Mitchell and Susan Young,
project manager of 'Framing the Future'. It was commissioned by
the Australian National Training Authority in response to the report
'Re-framing the Future', which argued that the national staff development
program 'Framing the Future' was effective but could achieve more.
According to the authors, 'Framing the Future' can be expanded
to become more comprehensive in its coverage of staff development
and change management needs to become the national support program
underpinning the implementation of the national VET system.
The authors suggest the new name 'Reframing the Future' to signal
this expansion of services.
"The vision for 'Reframing the Future' is that, by 2005, the
fully integrated national VET system will be acknowledged world-wide
as a key contributor to Australia's economic growth and social well-being,"
they say.
CEO of ANTA Moira Scollay said the report's findings would contribute
to the ongoing training and development of Australia's VET practitioners.
"This study shows that Australia has world-class organisations
and individuals and provides an insight into what makes them succeed,"
she said.
"Current information about good practice in the field in invaluable
to both the VET and tertiary sector in developing education and
training for VET practitioners."
According to Mitchell and Young, the external environment is becoming
increasingly demanding for VET, with globalisation and information
and communication technologies impacting upon industries, enterprises
and individuals, generating a demand for new skills in the workforce.
"The changing Australian business and social landscape requires
VET providers to conduct staff development to ensure the continuous
re-skilling of an ageing and increasingly part-time and casual workforce,"
they say.
The study found that while the range of VET stakeholders have different
views about the trends in the VET environment, they agree that much
more needs to be done to ensure the industry-led national training
system becomes more responsive to various needs and is implemented
consistently.
The policy framework for this new environment is dominated by the
current ministerial focus on national consistency, risk management
and quality in the national training system.
"This policy imperative will need to be underpinned by the
provision of new, comprehensive and national change management and
staff development programs," Mitchell and Young note. At the
moment the VET environment is turbulent with the emergence of many
new trends creating challenges for the system, according to the
study which notes that this situation creates both opportunities
and threats for organisations.
The authors say that if VET organisations are to take advantage
of the opportunities provided by the environment, they need to develop
the following:
- Multi-faceted strategic plans to identify priorities and to
develop strategies to meet a wide range of needs;
- The organisational structures, skills and resources, particularly
the flexibility and creativity, to respond to such a complex environment.
VET stakeholders interviewed for the study agreed that much more
needs to be done to ensure the national training system becomes
more responsive to various needs and is implemented thoroughly.
During the course of interviews for the study many people advocated
the need for forums and mechanisms to debate and critique the assumptions
and construction of the national training framework, in terms of
continual improvement. Criticisms included:
- Asense that the national training framework was introduced in
the mid-1990s in a top-down, dogmatic fashion, with few opportunities
for those in the field of VET to influence or change the policy;
- A sense that the national training framework ignored the skills
and devalued the contribution of VET provider personnel who delivered
institution-based training; and
- A belief that the initial Training Packages were often of uneven
quality.
Copyright Campus Review
|