|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
Higher Education Review ProcessVarieties of Learning: the Interface between Higher Education and Vocational Education and Training4. some key issues70 The interface between the sectors has developed by-and-large in the absence of major policies or incentives at national level to strengthen collaboration and cooperation, although there have been some initiatives to foster credit transfer and joint capital developments. Even in areas of obvious overlap such as the diploma/associate degree, there are no strong coordinated planning mechanisms at the national level. In addition, the planning focus within each of the sectors has often been on the financial demands of providers, rather than on the learning needs of individuals. 71 Confusion is increased by the fact that in some jurisdictions, TAFEs (or equivalents) are now offering their own ‘technical’ degrees. For example, the Victorian Government recently announced that it will allow Victorian TAFE institutes to offer degrees in niche areas such as viticulture, aquaculture, information technology and biotechnology, on a fee-for-service basis. At the same universities have increased the range of professional courses offered, including fields of study that might traditionally have been offered as vocational education and training. 72 A threshold issue is whether there are benefits in a more strategic and coordinated approach. 73 The forces shaping the growing interface between the higher education and VET sectors are likely to continue in the foreseeable future. Therefore, the interface could be expected to continue to grow. This may lead to the proliferation of providers competing in regional centres, operating on quite different cost structures and with entirely different Government funding systems. As a large country with a small population, Australia might be better served by a more strategically focussed approach to cooperation and concentration of resources. A more strategic approach may also improve the opportunities for Australians to gain access to higher education. This could be done without imposing constraints on either sector or rewriting their respective missions and purposes. Young Australians in particular may benefit from development of a coordinated policy framework for education transitions, based on a better understanding of unmet demand by school leavers for VET and higher education, including whether this demand could be met in overall terms by improved coordination and reprioritisation. a. credit transfer
74 While there have been significant advances in recent years to improve credit transfer arrangements between the VET and higher education sectors, more needs to be done. Streamlined credit transfer processes may go some way to breaking down the systemic barriers to educational pathways, and maximise the quality of students’ learning. 75 Where there are no formal credit transfer arrangements in place, processes can be time-consuming and resource intensive, often because there is limited evidence contained in transcripts and certificates. This case-by-case approach may also result, over time, in inconsistent treatment of the same or similar VET qualification, and impact disproportionately on disadvantaged groups (Australian Indigenous Training Council, Submission 4; ANTA, Submission 289). 76 Should there be more effort to broaden formal credit transfer arrangements so that the number of ad hoc cases are minimised? 77 A number of barriers to effective credit transfer have been identified and are discussed below. differences in sectoral approaches to learning and assessment78 Higher education programmes are curriculum-based, while VET programmes are based on outcomes defined as competencies, increasingly specified in National Training Packages. This can make it difficult for higher education to accurately gauge the extent to which students transferring from VET share the same knowledge base as students who have undertaken all their study in the higher education sector. As noted by the AVCC:
79 The NCVER notes that the introduction of training packages in VET has presented special problems for articulation:
university admissions processes
80 As self-accrediting institutions, universities individually determine who will be admitted for study. There is considerable variation in these practices. Some institutions rank all applicants in terms of relative merit, while others have more open entry policies and admit many students on the basis of work experience or institution specific assessment. 81 Cohen and Stone (1997) assessed admissions policies and practices of three New South Wales universities in 1996 and found substantial variation. While all applications were assessed by the universities admissions centre system, the degree to which factors other than academic qualifications and performance were taken into consideration and the method of assessing them varied greatly. The researchers commented that:
82 The authors suggested further research to evaluate credit transfer policies and Recognition of Prior Learning procedures as applied specifically to TAFE graduates. 83 The use of a non-graded, competent/not-yet-competent basis for reporting modules or units in the VET sector, compared with marks/rankings used in the secondary and higher education sectors, can also create difficulties for admission. It has been suggested that universities respond to this dilemma by assigning a single notional score to everyone presenting with the same qualification. However, this would likely be an ‘average’ score, which may reduce students’ chances of success (ANTA/AVCC, 2000). While some universities may use alternative approaches such as interview or portfolio assessment, these are time-consuming and costly to develop. Shoemaker et al. (2000) note that a de facto graded assessment has often emerged to fill the need of higher education for articulation, and of industry to discriminate between graduates. professional associations84 In setting eligibility requirements for membership, professional associations can have a major influence on the design and content of courses, and this in turn can impact on credit arrangements in certain discipline areas and courses. For example, like most professional associations, the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia specifies certain courses and units that must be completed to be eligible for Institute membership. If an applicant is granted any exemptions for these units by a university, he/she must also apply to the Institute for recognition of exemptions granted. Advanced standing granted by tertiary institutions based on the TAFE Associate Diploma of Business (Accounting) or Advanced Diploma in Accounting is recognised provided it is within the ICAA’s Advanced Standing Policy. In general advanced standing of up to 12 subjects (in a 24 subject bachelor degree) can be accepted. lack of awareness85 Students may not be aware that credit transfer may apply for their TAFE qualifications, or may be uncertain about their own ability to navigate the bureaucratic processes involved. A survey of New South Wales TAFE students (Cohen and Stone, 1997) found that most students knew only a limited amount about university admission, even when they expressed interest in attending university, and that their information was often inaccurate. Much was based on informal or anecdotal comments from friends or colleagues, and few mentioned mature age entry, credit transfer or the importance of good results. Since the survey there have been many changes to credit transfer arrangements and the amount of information available to students in relation to articulation has grown substantially. Nevertheless, there remains the need to improve the amount and quality of information to VET graduates about opportunities for higher education study. b. articulation/joint courses86 As noted above, articulation involves a sequential pathway between VET and higher education qualifications, with multiple entry and exit points. Joint courses are developed in collaboration between the participating institutions, with components taught, assessed and accredited by the respective institutions and with credit transfer built in. Nested courses have exit points along the way with a subsidiary qualification, while concurrent courses involve students enrolled simultaneously in both institutions. These types of integrated awards have clear advantages for students:
87 Multiple exit points also allow students to leave their options open, and may offer more gradual introduction to the more independent and self-directed university learning environment (Teese, 1999). 88 A number of submissions to this Review support growth in articulation and/or joint courses (for example, ANTA, Submission 289; TAFE Directors Australia, Submission 322; South Australian Government, Submission 334). However, the development of such courses is not always easy:
89 The nature of learning and the type of learning referred to by Sommerlad can be critical issues depending on the field of study. For example, a case study that looked at the linking of telecommunications diploma qualifications offered by RMIT University’s TAFE arm with the Bachelor of Engineering (Communications) course offered by the University’s higher education arm found that there were significant difficulties in establishing common ground. The study contrasted the technical applications focus of the diploma course with the conceptual, mathematical basis of the first two years of the degree course, and concluded that to move from diploma to degree involved “a quantum leap in both content and pedagogy” (ANTA/AVCC, 2000, p.98). 90 A study of VET learners in the context of flexible delivery found they were characterised by a preference for dependent learning, rather than self-directed learning, and a preference for learning through observation and direct experience rather than through verbal presentations. The researcher noted that his findings provided some support for suggestions in the literature that VET learners typically require assistance to become self-directed learners (Smith, 2000). Shoemaker et al. (2000) noted that the “ramifications of these observations do not appear to have been considered in many joint course developments” (Shoemaker et al., 2000, p.93). 91 The Smoother Pathways Project at Victoria University (VU) investigated its students’ experiences of articulation, with a particular focus on the pathway from the TAFE Associate Diploma in Business into the bachelor degree in the VU Faculty of Business and Law. There was a concern that some articulating students had difficulties in Corporate Law, a subject normally taken by non-articulating students in their second semester or year. The project found that the main factors affecting ease of transition were sudden changes in the depth and detail of subject knowledge, pedagogical approach and assessment and the level, genre and independent nature of academic research and writing.
92 The researchers noted that first year subjects provided a degree of support which did not exist for articulating students, and made a number of suggestions including involvement of higher education representatives in development of TAFE modules; an elective system within the second year of the Associate Diploma for those students who planned to articulate; a bridging programme; and staff mentoring. 93 Teese (1996) reported that other universities have “streamed” articulating students, on the basis of their performance in their TAFE studies, and provided additional support where necessary. He concluded that the combination of smaller classes, greater supervision, bridging and streaming appeared to be successful, pointing to findings of other researchers that “TAFE students entering degree programs perform at the same standard as students recruited directly from school, notwithstanding the initial differences in average attainment between them” (Teese, 1999, p.6). 94 In establishing dual sector awards each sector may have to come to grips with forms of assessment used by the other. Doughney offers a challenge to universities: funding and reporting regimes95 A number of commentators argue that differences in funding and reporting regimes make it extremely difficult to develop dual sector programmes as funding, administration and reporting arrangements must be negotiated and resolved each time. Dual sector universities appear to find this particularly difficult. A survey of staff in dual-sector institutions suggested that this is a major obstacle to developing the potential of a dual-sector structure.
96 Articulated awards are relatively easy to manage in this regard. Students enrol sequentially in each institution, receive two student numbers, and pay TAFE fees for the TAFE component of the award and HECS for the university component. The sticking point is the managing of single awards that span the two sectors. One university respondent said they explored the possibility of cross-sectoral teaching in dual awards but abandoned this as too difficult because of the separate funding levels and different industrial awards (Doughney, 2000). limited financial incentives97 Limited financial incentives exist for collaborative activity, in particular to compensate institutions for the time and resources that must be invested to set up cross-sectoral awards and review them to maintain the currency of the component parts. It has been suggested that if cross sectoral arrangements were partially funded by government, this would signal government commitment to collaboration as a central policy objective and acknowledge the resource intensive nature of the collaborative process (ANTA/AVCC, 2000). 98 Victoria University notes other obstacles to improving cross-sectoral links, including the lack of a coherent national policy framework on lifelong learning; absence of a central government advisory, policy or administrative body responsible for tertiary education as a whole; and absence of reporting mechanisms and performance indicators relating to cross sectoral activity (Victoria University, Submission 215). 99 Despite the structural and attitudinal barriers which militate against collaboration in teaching,
100 Given the benefits of articulated and joint courses, are there ways in which institutions could be encouraged to build on the successes to date? Is there a need for a more structured and systematic approach to the development of cross-sectoral courses? student financial contributions101 Higher Education at the Crossroads highlighted an anomaly whereby two students who graduate from a university with the same qualification might pay significantly different amounts because of the different pathways they took to the bachelor degree. A student who undertakes a TAFE diploma-level qualification and pays TAFE course fees and then articulates into a degree course would pay significantly less for their qualification than a student who studies solely at university and pays HECS for the duration of their course. The TAFE component of the course is heavily subsidised by the relevant State or Territory government (with a contribution from the Commonwealth), while the higher education component of the course is heavily subsidised by the Commonwealth. Some VET providers may offer VET or higher education accredited diploma courses for which no public subsidy is available. 102 The different costs to students reflect in part the different costs of delivery of courses in the two sectors. Of more concern from a policy perspective is whether access to education is being affected by the mandatory payment of upfront fees in TAFE, contrasting with the availability of HECS loans in higher education. The Commonwealth Minister has announced that the Government does not have a plan to extend HECS to TAFE courses (see Media Release of 4 June 2002). The question remains as to whether higher education courses delivered through TAFE or private providers should be subject to similar arrangements to those in universities. Should students undertaking accredited higher education courses in VET institutions have access to income-contingent loans? Should this be extended to VET accredited diploma courses that articulate fully to a degree? Would this be a more equitable approach for students? Would this provide a more coherent framework for the development of joint and articulated courses? 103 Chapman considers that in respect of courses that articulate closely to university:
104 The Queensland University of Technology sees introduction of a HECS scheme or similar for TAFE courses that articulate with university degrees as a valuable step forward. “A move such as this would help further to streamline the transition from these courses to university degrees.” (Submission 96, p.31) 105 The Australian Council for Private Education and Training (ACPET) supports extension of higher education funding arrangements to certain diploma-level qualifications offered by private providers:
106 Other submissions oppose the introduction of HECS for students in VET programmes. For example, TAFE Directors Australia is “strongly opposed to the introduction of a HECS type scheme for TAFE programs articulating into university courses” (Submission 322, p.15). It argues that the view that the current situation is inequitable ignores several considerations:
107 Several State governments in submissions to this Review argue against introducing HECS in TAFE if it would result in a shift in funding responsibilities from Commonwealth to State governments. 108 The South Australian Government submission expresses opposition to “any system of funding which shifts the funding of higher education to the States and Territories” (Submission 334, p.6). There is, however, no intention to shift funding responsibility for higher education from the Commonwealth to the States and Territories. 109 The Queensland Government does not support the “introduction or extension of HECS to the public VET sector”, and states that:
110 Other arguments against some form of HECS in TAFE centre on the relatively small number of students who currently articulate into degree programmes; the possible incentive that the introduction of HECS at the upper levels of TAFE could create for State governments to raise TAFE fees; the potential deterrent effect on student participation if associated with increased student contribution; the potential impact on accessibility for disadvantaged groups; and the significant number of fee exemptions/discounts currently provided to disadvantaged students (for example, Australian Education Union, Submission 48; Holmesglen Institute of TAFE, Submission 164; TAFE Directors Australia, Submission 322; WA Department of Training, Submission 232). 111 There are a number of implementation issues that would need to be addressed. Several submissions note the practical difficulties in distinguishing for purposes of HECS liability between students and courses which articulate and those which do not (WA Department of Training, Submission 232; RMIT University, Submission 273; TAFE Directors Australia, Submission 322). However, this would not be an issue if HECS type arrangements were limited to those courses accredited as higher education courses. This could, however, create a drift away from the diploma and advanced diploma courses accredited through VET processes, which are typically competency based and increasingly based on national Training Packages. c. dual sector universities112 Arguments in favour of the dual sector model centre on the opportunities for economies of scale, programme linkages and partnerships through co-location and shared infrastructure (TAFE Directors Australia, Submission 322). All the dual sector universities have formal policies governing articulation and accreditation of dual-sector and nested awards. The dual sector model seems particularly appropriate to the needs of regional areas where students can access a ‘one-stop-shop’ for education and training, and institutions and regions can access the economies of operating a single institution in an isolated area (House of Representatives, 1998). 113 Opinions vary widely on the extent to which dual sector universities fulfil the promise afforded by their status. Shoemaker et al. (2000) described dual sector institutions as “all quite innovative in such areas as the design of student-centered course pathways and all are ‘stand outs’ in terms of major industry liaison and partnerships”. A submission to the Review suggests that:
114 It has been suggested that, in comparison with mainstream TAFE, a higher proportion of the student cohort in a dual sector institution expressly enters TAFE with the purpose of further study, and a much higher proportion achieves this outcome (ANTA/AVCC, 2000). Status as a dual sector institution confers a marketing advantage in terms of appeal to potential students:
115 However, dual sector institutions experience a number of difficulties. 116 First, it is expensive for dual-sector institutions to maintain integrated structures because of the need to disaggregate budgets and resources for reporting purposes. Different capital funding processes between the sectors also make it difficult to plan integrated campuses, and use of buildings and reporting is difficult.
117 There are calls for development of funding and reporting models that overcome the difficulties dual sector universities currently face (for example, TAFE Directors Association, Submission 322; RMIT University, Submission 273; Northern Territory University, Submission 156). A suggestion in a recent review by the Victorian Government (2002) of university governance indicates a potential willingness to address the issue. The review suggests that, in view of Victoria’s leadership in establishing and developing dual sector universities:
118 A joint review has the potential to significantly improve opportunities for inter-sectoral cooperation both in dual sector universities and more generally. 119 Secondly, award conditions for staff can vary within dual-sector institutions. Dual sector institutions can operate autonomously in respect of higher education staff, but require State government endorsement of conditions of staff employed under TAFE awards (House of Representatives, 1998). 120 TAFE Directors Australia note that members’ opinions about dual sector institutions are divided; most prefer TAFE and universities to be separate, but to cooperate and collaborate more effectively than at present. However, they also note that there are advantages in having more than one model of TAFE/university cooperative delivery to allow diversity of choice (Submission 322). d. multi-sector campuses121 The multi-sector campus approach is well suited to the Australian context in which a relatively small population is sparsely distributed across a vast continent. Such a model enables a critical mass and economies of scale to be established in regional centres that may not have a population of sufficient size to warrant two and sometimes three separate infrastructure developments for post-compulsory education. 122 The potential benefits of multi-sector partnerships include: more cost-effective provision of education and training, particularly in regional areas; increased opportunities for articulation and development of joint award programmes; facilitated movement of students between the sectors; and broadened horizons for students from both sectors. Some consider that the shared campus model has advantages over the dual sector university model in that the partners retain their separate identities, which reduces the need to “report to two masters”. The House of Representatives inquiry (1998) explicitly favoured co-location of TAFE and higher education institutions over dual sector institutions under the one administration. 123 While commentators agree on the potential benefits of the multi-sector approach and point to anecdotal accounts of the success of a number of existing arrangements, Shoemaker et al. (2000) argued that attempts to systematically evaluate the model have encountered the following difficulties:
124 Efforts to expand provision of shared campuses face a number of challenges, including funding arrangements and issues of governance and accountability, which affect all cross-sectoral collaboration to some degree. 125 The development of shared campuses has been encouraged by the provision of special capital funds through the Commonwealth Capital Development Pool (CDP) element of higher education funding. One of the criteria for new campus developments, as set out in the Ministerial guidelines for CDP, is:
126 In the recent funding round for the 2004 CDP, twelve of the 26 projects funded involve either the shared use of facilities between the university and TAFE sectors or the development of flexible networking between education sectors. The capacity to develop partnerships in regional areas is constrained by the funding limits on both electronic and capital infrastructure and the limits on the number of higher education places. There is little financial incentive for higher education institutions to incur the additional costs in setting up shared campus arrangements, since they must effectively redirect a portion of their recurrent and capital grants to these shared arrangements with TAFE colleges. 127 Multi-sector campuses can face a similar complexity of Commonwealth and State/Territory legislative and accountability frameworks as dual sector institutions. It has been suggested that the only viable long-term solution to these issues is an autonomous legal and management framework based on equal partnership between the founding partners (Shoemaker et al., 2000). e. infrastructure sharing in regional areas128 An alternative to the multi-sector campus is a cooperative approach whereby higher education staff are located in regional TAFE colleges in order to provide teaching for early years of higher education awards. Students would then move to a university’s main campus to complete their awards. The South Australian Government submission notes that:
129 The Queensland Government submission supports further development of partnerships for service provision and delivery between regional universities, other education and training providers, government and the community, noting that:
130 In its submission to the Review, the WA Department of Training noted that:
131 One suggestion is for incentives to be provided to encourage universities, TAFE institutions and other stakeholders to enter into partnerships to extend higher education provision into rural communities. 132 There may be scope for improving the coordination of education provision at the local level, where cooperation between providers is often left to market-based solutions. 133 Funding decisions taken at the national level make little provision for debate about priorities at the regional level. For example, decisions might be made about additional university provision in a particular location, whereas seen from a regional perspective, greater benefit and better value might be obtained if additional options were available through the VET system in the region. f. research collaboration134 In its submission to the Review, the WA Department of Training considers there could be significant benefits to both sectors in working collaboratively on applied research. The Department argues that universities:
135 The Department notes that three years ago, the then Western Australia Government set up a Science and Technology Innovation Fund offering financial support for the State’s training providers to collaborate with industry, university, government and other bodies to undertaken innovative science and technology projects. The Fund has attracted strong interest from industry and the VET sector, but the submission notes that it “has not been particularly successful in attracting projects involving partnerships between the university sector, VET and industry.” The Department points to potential for strong economic and other benefits, “particularly if such a scheme were available nationally” (Submission 232, p.12). 136 TAFE Directors Australia see a role for TAFE in collaboration with others in taking forward the results of university-based R&D and further developing them into products and processes that can be taken into the market place. In their submission to the Review, the Central Coast Campuses Board states that multi sector organisations are, by nature of the characteristics of the partners, well suited to develop industry-focussed programmes and research, and points to specialisations which the Central Coast Campuses have developed in Early Childhood Education and Food Technology. The Board recommends that multi-sector campuses be given Commonwealth support to develop niche-based programmes and research capabilities (Submission 219). g. qualifications issues137 As the interface between higher education and VET has grown so has the debate about which sector should offer what qualifications. This has been fuelled in recent years with decisions by several State governments to allow TAFE institutes to offer some degree level courses and the decision by some universities to offer associate degrees and VET qualifications. 138 Several stakeholders argue for a clear delineation between the sectors on the basis of qualifications offered and that this delineation should reflect the different missions of the two sectors. Others argue that there should be a range of qualifications that should be offered by both sectors and that the key issue is not the level of qualification but the needs of the students and the labour market. In submissions to this Review a range of positions are put. 139 The submission from TAFE Directors Australia recommends that the Commonwealth support the principle of TAFE institutes offering degrees with an applied learning basis. The submission argues that VET higher education courses generally do not replicate those offered by universities:
140 Other arguments advanced in favour of delivery of higher education qualifications by VET are the greater cost effectiveness with which VET can provide undergraduate programmes, enhancement of Australia’s skill mix, potential for creation of more integrated pathways from certificate to degree level with multiple exit points to meet student demand, greater accessibility to disadvantaged groups and enhanced global competitiveness in provision of education and training (WA Department of Training, Submission 232; TAFE Directors Australia, Submission 322). 141 The House of Representatives Committee on Employment, Education and Workplace Relations argued strongly against TAFE institutes offering degrees:
142 The AVCC:
143 There is also much debate about use of the term ‘associate degree’ and which sectors should be offering diploma level qualifications and graduate diploma and certificate qualifications. Moodie suggests that:
144 Resolution of these issues is appropriately one that needs the input of all parties including the universities, other higher education providers, VET providers and State/Territory governments. The Australian Qualifications Framework Advisory Board (AQFAB) is currently undertaking a review of associate degrees. h. the impact of future demand on both sectors145 With participation in post compulsory education standing at high levels in Australia both historically and in relation to international comparisons, there is scope for debate about the likelihood and nature of any future increases in demand. A number of factors are relevant:
|
|||
|
Any comments or
queries should be sent to:
highered@dest.gov.au
Department of Education, Science and Training
|
