VET Workforce Capability
The Australian Skills Quality Authority (ASQA) have just released their Regulatory Risk Priorities for 2023-2024 and there is a bit of chatter on LinkedIn about one particular priority of VET Workforce Capability (initiated by my esteemed colleague, Wendy Cato). Based on some of the comments, I thought I would post here my utopia of developing a trainer and assessor for the VET workforce.
Firstly, I do think it is important to have a base level of knowledge and understanding of effective training delivery before heading into the training environment. However, this would depend on the mode of training delivery being engaged in:
Face-to-face training classroom environment
Online virtual training environment
In the workplace in a trainee-style format
Currently, the Standards for RTOs 2015 require one of two skill sets to begin delivering training under supervision. Without going into the detail of the units of competency, the TAESS00020 Workplace Trainer Skill Set aims to address the workplace option, however the TAESS00028 Work Skill Instructor Skill Set is also very trainee-style based in that the group delivery of training is to 1-2 participants. Neither of these options really prepare people to deliver in a group in a face-to-face or online setting.
The beauty of the new TAE training package is the vast array of skill sets that the upcoming replacement Standards could draw on, including skill sets specific to teachers in schools, volunteers and delivery to young learners as opposed to adults. What would be ideal is for the new Standards to draw on these skill sets to cater for a range of settings where new trainers could work under supervision utilising an appropriate skill set. While there will be a challenge designing something in a legislative instrument that caters for these various settings, I think it is important to recognise that it should consider the three modes of initial delivery that someone will be undertaking (listed above) and ensure they are equipped with the necessary communication skills, along with some strategies to facilitate initial learning with participants in the relevant setting. At this point the new trainer does not necessarily need to understand the full realm of organisations within the VET sector, how to pull apart a training package and who wrote them and how, or how to develop assessment tools. At the basic entry level of a new trainer, we should be working with them on a concept they need to be able to train someone in, and how those messages can be conveyed, checked for understanding, reinforced, and re-explained or demonstrated as needed.
Once the new trainer can start to demonstrate, under active supervision, they are able to communicate the message, check for understanding, re-address where necessary, and consolidate learning, then we can move onto the next step of helping them with understanding how to plan a session. Currently, they will often be planning a session without fully understanding how they will be able to communicate that content. Asking someone to research, plan a full session or unit, and then go and deliver it is essentially throwing them in the deep end. This can be so overwhelming to new entrants. When teaching someone how to play a musical instrument we don’t ask them to start with learning the structure of complex composition. We start with learning the basic notes and chords. A simple performance. And once that is mastered, we go into more depth around the how and the why of the composition. If teaching someone to be a mechanic, we start with the simple tasks first, like an oil change. We don’t ask them to design an engine and then build it (automotive trainers please correct me if I’m wrong). So why do we ask trainers to start with the hardest part first? Why aren’t we building their confidence in some of the smaller pieces before moving into planning and developing a unit of work?
There is a reason for us not using the model I have just described. It is time intensive and requires much more support for the new trainer than many have available to them. Personally, I think the fees associated with completing a Certificate IV in Training and Assessment qualification (code omitted as this applies to all versions) are not high enough with any provider. This isn’t the fault of the TAE providers; it is the fault of the industry as a whole. The Cert IV qualification is entry-level to the industry for a dual professional (vocational + educational). Generally, if you are entering a trade in another industry the cost of a qualification will be much more over the period of completion compared to what is paid for a TAE qualification. The time put into that trade is also over a longer period of time, sometimes up to 4 years. While I’m not suggesting we take 4 years to become a qualified trainer, I do feel there needs to be more mentoring, more observation and feedback and more focus on performance.
One of the most influential men in VET in Australia, John Dwyer, has always said that becoming a trainer should be treated like an apprenticeship. It shouldn’t be something to tick a box. When we become trainers, we are entering a new profession. The profession of being an educator. That is a profession I am proud to be a part of. However, we need to put more value on the entry-level qualification to become part of this profession, and also put into place career progression options for people to keep them motivated to become better trainers. In other education sectors, people strive to complete a Masters qualification (mostly school teachers), or a PhD (university sector). Whilst we have the Diploma options, generally it will only be people who are looking to be in management who will complete those.
Some crazy ideas that may (or may not) be viable for future VET leaders to consider:
Mandate (under new Standards) a skill set that will equip new trainers to work under supervision in their chosen environment (F2F, online or one-to-one) but limit the amount of time they can work under supervision, and require a training plan be in place to work towards completing the full qualification within a set period of time.
The training plan mentioned above may have key targets in place. For example, completion of their assessment units by X amount of time into the plan (say 1 year for example).
Provide government-funded support to create places for the completion of a Certificate IV in Training and Assessment as a traineeship/apprenticeship. It certainly is a skills shortage area! Just talk to some of the major industry players about trying to attract trainers away from their industry. People often have to take a pay cut to become a trainer, plus they have all this work to do outside of their day-to-day job (very paperwork based, which many trades-people do not like/want), and they see the Certificate IV as overwhelming and just too much. But they would love to be delivering training in their industry area.
The above government funding should be more than what providers are currently charging for TAE qualifications. They are charging this because of what the market will pay, and then having to adjust their practices to match. Instead of working out how to create a quality, effective training strategy, working out the cost of that and then determining their fees. There is no room in the current fee structures to be able to commit significant time to ensure our new trainers entering the industry are developed to the level they need to be.
These are my musings about our VET workforce capability. I would love to hear your responses! Comment via LinkedIn.
Kerri Buttery