Articles

The creation of the Australian industry and skills committee, and the governance and operational reform lessons of the new Australian curriculum development model

By: Simon Whatmore, Nicholas Wyman and Andrew Sezonov
Institute for Workplace Skills and Innovation, Victoria, Australia

Summary:

In 2015, the Commonwealth of Australia instituted new governance arrangements for curriculum development across its Vocational Education and Training (VET) sector. This paper outlines Council of Australian Governments (COAG) changes to the governance and operating model for validating nationally recognised training packages (the curriculum units taught through apprenticeship programs), leading to the establishment of the Australian Industry and Skills Committee (AISC).

This case study outlines the governmental reform process preceding the AISC’s formation, and reviews the impact of the AISC’s operational and validation model in the development, approval and implementation of new training packages in Australia.

Introduction

The vocational education sector is significant in advancing and innovating Australian education models. Described as “nationally directed, jurisdictionally implemented and industry-driven” (Atkinson and Stanwick, 2016), the sector is built around curriculum building blocks (training packages) – sets of nationally endorsed standards for recognising and assessing skills required by an individual to hold a vocation-specific qualification.

Since the late 1990s, Australian training packages were developed by Industry Skills Councils (ISCs). ISCs were independent, not-for-profit advisory bodies contracted by the Australian government to undertake package development as part of broader industry promotion and workforce development functions, which were then provided to a delegated ministerial committee for endorsement. This model ratified 60 training packages containing more than 1,600 qualifications covering 85 per cent of Australian occupations.

Established as bipartite federated stakeholder boards, each ISC functioned under its own unique constitution, board structure and funding system. Reflecting the VET sector’s origins in traditional trades training, these councils were technically oriented and incremental in the evolution of their training packages.

During the past decade, the suitability of the ISC training package development and endorsement model has been challenged by a number of macro trends, including: sectoral shifts in the economy and the expansion of service sector employment; the impact of technological change on traditional industrial processes; the dynamism and growth of jobs in ‘new economy’ sectors; and the deregulation and subsequent expansion of registered training organisations.

A survey of Australian employers identified concerns with the limitations of the ISCs’ siloed operating and development processes, indicating the need for structural change to develop and deliver training packages for an innovation-driven future focused on services, technology, cross-sector skills and flexible training delivery models (NCVER 2013). Industry’s reduced confidence in the relevancy and quality of the vocational training system, as well as declining apprenticeship enrolments at this time, led to the creation of the VET Reform Taskforce in November 2013.

The aim of this case study was to outline the reform process preceding AISC’s formation and review the impact its new governance model on the development and validation of new training packages in Australia, as assessed by key informants.

Methods and research design

The authors, who are active in the Australian vocational education sector, evaluated data from a range of public policy documents and submissions generated through the government’s consultation process before the AISC’s establishment (2014-2015).

The authors also obtained qualitative insight through conducting, in late 2018, a number of semi-structured key informant interviews, including representatives of the AISC, Australian government, training providers and industry stakeholder bodies to identify perceived benefits and drawbacks of the new governance model. A content analysis of these interview notes was undertaken to determine key themes for this conference presentation.

New governance model

In 2014, to help ensure the VET system could sufficiently respond to industry trends and generate training packages adequately supporting projected future skills needs, the ministerial-level COAG Industry and Skills Council (CISC) was formed.

At its inaugural meeting, the CISC agreed upon VET system reform objectives, particularly “to ensure that industry is involved in policy development and oversight of the performance of the VET sector and to streamline governance arrangements and committees” (COAG, 2014).

The council also initiated a thorough first-principle review of the sector, emphasising the key themes of: industry responsiveness; quality and regulation; funding and governance; and data and consumer information.
Designed to revitalise industry engagement with the national training system, the council conducted an extensive consultation process with the ISCs, relevant stakeholders and the public.

It then determined to reform the system through dissolution of the ISCs and the introduction of new governance arrangements in addition to the implementation of a contestability model and clear formal processes to access government funding for training package development.

The new model was designed to:

• strengthen industry leadership of training package development and review so that training better aligns with jobs in the modern economy
• prioritise the development and review of training packages based on industry demand for skills across sectors
• improve collaboration among stakeholders involved in training package development.

Under the new arrangements, the CISC distributed the tasks previously performed by the ISC across three new entities:

• Australian Industry and Skills Committee – a committee of industry leaders with the overarching formal responsibility for funding and approving training packages, advising the CISC on industry needs, and prioritising and managing the operations of the all IRCs and SSOs

• Industry Reference Committees (IRCs) – established by the AISC and populated by people with industry experience, skills and knowledge, IRCs provide expert advice, ensuring training packages meet employer needs. IRCs work with SSOs to prepare annual forecasts and business cases to identify emerging skills gaps and project needs to update and maintain the relevance of training products.

• Skills Service Organisations (SSOs) – independent service organisations providing technical, operational and secretariat functions to their IRCs. This includes preparing business cases for change, developing and revising new training packages, and reporting to and liaising with the AISC. Six SSOs support 67 IRCs.

In 2016, the new operating model came into effect. As the transitional period is complete and stakeholders have worked through two planning cycles under the new system, we can now assess the comparative advantages of the new model, and suggest potential lessons for policy-makers facing similar challenges in other jurisdictions.

The new governance model, with defined roles and responsibilities for each entity, is detailed in Figure 1.

Lessons from the AISC reforms

In seeking to determine the impact of the AISC era, the authors asked interview subjects what they viewed as the successes and comparative advantages and disadvantages of the new governance structure, how the AISC was viewed within their professional networks, and to provide anecdotal insight where applicable. The key themes to emerge from these interviews were:

Clearer accountability and standardisation of processes
Respondents agreed that, under the AISC model, stakeholders’ expectations and standard roles and responsibilities of the training package development, endorsement and implementation process was clearer and more process-oriented, as a result of targeted briefings and communications. Clearer role definition improved accountability and responsiveness from the IRCs and SSOs in revising packages. However, final approval for implementation, which requires CISC agreement, remains time-consuming and a potential bottleneck. It was also noted that drafting of training packages for new and emergent industry remains an iterative process slowed by determining scope, identifying and engaging with new stakeholders, and mediating conflicting views.

Development of an economy-wide narrative for skills
All respondents agreed the AISC has been proactive in creating a sense of collective purpose, and generating and disseminating an evidence base to identify and respond proactively to cross-sectoral trends and skills needs. Through initiating a comprehensive annual qualitative survey of IRC members’ skills and insights, the AISC has been able to successfully commence thematic cross-sector projects tackling subjects such as automation, digital skills and disability inclusion.

Greater consultation with industry expert advisers
As of 2019, the AISC has enabled 67 IRCs with a combined membership of approximately 800 stakeholders (compared with 12 Boards and approximately 100 stakeholders engaged under the ISC model). Respondents’ overwhelming view is that more people and newer voices with first-hand knowledge of the skills required by industry are being engaged throughout the process. However, some respondents suggested more effort could be made to engage representatives of small to medium enterprises.

Conclusion

There appears to be general consensus that the adoption of the AISC has been successful in improving consultation with stakeholders and the responsiveness and accountability of the support entities.
The AISC, with its overarching governance and strategy role, has also successfully been able to identify trends and skills needs with cross-sector implications, determine strategic priorities and initiate cross-sector projects to address these challenges in a method which would not be possible under the previous training package development structure.

Literature

Atkinson, G. & Stanwick, J. (2016). Trends in VET: policy and participation. Adelaide: NCVER.
Bowman, K & McKenna, S 2016, The development of Australia’s national training system: a dynamic tension between consistency and flexibility, NCVER, Adelaide
COAG CISC VET Reform – CISC Communique April 2014 [https://docs.education.gov.au/documents/cisc-communique-april-2014]
Department of Education and Training (2014) Review of Training Packages and Accredited Courses – Discussion Paper. Canberra. Commonwealth of Australia.
NCVER (2013), Australian vocational education and training statistics: employers’ use and views of the VET system 2013, NCVER, Adelaide
Noonan, P. (2016). VET funding in Australia: Background, trends and future direction. Melbourne: Mitchell Institute.

About INAP

INAP, the International Network on Innovative Apprenticeship has steadily grown to incorporate researchers from all over the world. In 2019 it’s 8th international conference hosted by Konstanz University, Germany, points to various issues linked to contemporary apprenticeship reforms and reconfigurations, which indicates the need for apprenticeships to deliver on its promise of workplace skills and for it to evolve and also to change as the world economies develop.

Apprenticeship is a model of work and training, which has benefits for many different types of economies and societies. Specific areas of research are represented in Konstanz by the following topics and from different countries’ perspectives:

Governance and Stakeholders

Teaching and Learning

Academisation in Apprenticeships

Diversity and Inclusiveness

Internationalisation and Transfer of VET Services

Future Work: New Employment Patterns

Future Work: Industry 4.0

School to Work Transition and Youth Employment

Modern Fields of TVET Research and Practice

Bryan Reynolds | State Journal

Three local civil service apprentices updated Nicholas Wyman, CEO of the Institute for Workplace Skills and Innovation, about their experiences with the new Kentucky program on Friday.

RayLang, Isaiah Dunlap and Dusty Barnes are all IT apprentices with the state. Lang and Barnes are apprentices through the Kentucky Cabinet of Transportation and Dunlap’s program is through the Kentucky Personnel Cabinet.

“Last May, we announced our effort at expanding apprenticeship into the civil service sector, so state and local government,” said Deborah Williamson, director of the Kentucky Registered Apprenticeship Program. “We had four agencies, three cabinets and one county judge-executive office, who said ‘yes we’d like to try it.’”

The program began with four occupations; IT technicians, a mechanic technician, office administration and direct support services, she explained.

“They took off like a rocket,” Williamson said. “Well beyond our wildest dream.”

The civil service apprenticeship program is an attempt to solve a problem many businesses and state agencies have been having with filling jobs with trained, skilled employees, she explained.

“There has been a problem, particularly in the private sector, where employers are almost putting promising projects on the shelf because they can’t find people with the skills they need,” Wyman said. “Apprenticeship is really where companies are engaging in designing and developing a program that is going to build a future labor pipeline.”

Robert Blystone, field service manager for the Transportation Cabinet (KYTC), said the IT apprenticeship program is 2,000 hours long. The state works closely with local school districts to recruit graduates who took an IT pathway during their high school education.

“At that point, we go through interviews and select candidates that would be a great fit,” he explained. “From there we get them introduced to our facilities, to our operations and help get them started understanding where they’re at as individuals and how we can build off of that skill set.”

Each IT apprentice had varying degrees of experience with IT when they began the program and different reasons for choosing the program.

Lang said he had some computer hardware knowledge before beginning his apprenticeship but the education he received in high school in Shelby County was limited because only one computer class was offered.

“Through that class, I was offered this and was told it was basically that class but more intense,” he said. “I was told I would learn more and would get more out of it. I jumped on the chance because I just wanted more opportunities to do this work.”

Barnes, on the other hand, took four years of IT learning operations and help desk support and customer support. He didn’t have much experience with the hardware side of IT though until the apprenticeship program.

“I actually heard about the apprenticeship program two weeks before my graduation and I was looking for something to do because I actually have a family,” Barnes said. “This opportunity has helped me support my family and better my education at the same time so I can hopefully have a better future.”

Wyman said the Kentucky registered apprenticeship programs, like the civil service program, are built around certain standards and interested in making them quality programs.

He explained apprenticeships give people the chance to learn a dual set of skills; technical and interpersonal. It’s something that sets apprenticeship experience apart from university learning, which tends to focus on the technical and information, he said.

“There are a lot of questions about college affordability so this idea you can get paid to learn is very attractive to a lot of people,” Wyman said. “You don’t have to take on huge debt and the advantaged after your 2,000 hours compared to someone who just left a classroom only environment is pretty powerful.”

Blystone said apprenticeship programs are by no means the beginning, middle and end of education but a stepping stone. When Lang, Barnes and Dunlap complete their internships they will have many options available to them.

Lang said he intends to continue working with computer hardware after completing his 2,000-hour apprenticeship.

I really enjoy doing hardware and messing with computers because it has all the technical bits but minus the complexity and troubleshooting that is programming and software,” he explained.
Barnes, who currently has 1,000 of his 2,000 hours complete, said he would like to continue working for the KYTC but also continue his IT education.

Dunlap said he is examining all of the options that will be available to him after completing the program.

“I would 100 percent to a friend or other person because it offers a great experience,” Barnes said. “Working with the company that you plan on working for allows you to be a lot better prepared for their workforce.”

Article by Nicholas Wyman, CEO, IWSI America.

If there’s anything workforce experts agree on, it’s that the number of jobs that can be done more effectively by robots than humans is growing at an exponential rate.

Exponential. It’s hard to fathom the meaning of that. We’re in new territory – the Fourth Industrial Revolution. And it’s happening right now.

We’ve already seen jobs lost to automation – mostly those that involve repetitive, low-skilled, physical tasks (jobs in the auto industry and the textile industry being prime examples). And we know industrial automation will continue.

What many people might not know is that machines are already capable of doing more than just repetitive work – they can take on cognitive tasks as well. In fact, McKinsey estimates that 60% of all occupations have some portion, 30% or more, that can be automated with existing technology.

These findings echo a 2013 Oxford University study that found 47% of all jobs are vulnerable to automation within the next decade. Machine learning algorithms and vastly expanded sensor capability mean that computers can take in a constant stream of data, analyze that data for patterns and recommend solutions to problems humans can’t even see.

Which means jobs once thought to be exclusively human are now within the computer’s domain. In the medical field, computers can sort through vast data sets to analyze medical input and specify treatment options unique to each patient. Computers can also do legal work, ingesting and analyzing hundreds of thousands of legal documents for pre-trial research. It’s very likely that automation will encroach even into fields where human judgment holds sway, such as finance and software engineering.

These scenarios are not in the future; they are happening now. The world of work is changing fast. Some companies have taken steps to skill up for the future of work. JPMorgan Chase recently announced that it is investing $350 million over the next five years to train workers for jobs of the future. “Too many people are stuck in low-skill jobs that have no future and too many businesses cannot find the skilled workers they need,” said the company’s Chairman and CEO Jamie Dimon. He went on to say, “The new world of work is about skills, not necessarily degrees.”

It’s not just up to employers

Workers will have to change as well. We’ll need different skills and a different mindset to take on the age of automation age workplace. Some are obvious. We need people to run, manage, service and work with robots and other forms of automation. We need people to write the software. We need people to manage their fellow workers and workplace systems.

Other skills are slightly less obvious. According to a 2016 World Economic Forum (WEF) survey of Chief Human Resource Officers (CHROs) from the world’s largest employers, a key workplace skill is data analysis. Another key skill is specialized sales – people who can understand and market the many new technologies.

We’ll also need cross-functional and interdisciplinary skills – skills we can take with us across sectors and that help us work with people in other industries. One of the major trends identified by the WEF is the growing importance of social skills. They note that skills such as “persuasion, emotional intelligence and teaching others—will be in higher demand across industries than narrow technical skills, such as programming or equipment operation and control.”

Respondents to a recent Pew Research Centre survey of “technologists, scholars, practitioners, strategic thinkers and education leaders” agree. Many of them cite the need for social skills and a willingness to learn all throughout life – to take on challenges and see them through, to know how to think critically and solve problems. Understanding other cultures and societies in an increasingly global world is also a key skill cited in both the Pew and WEF surveys.

Pew respondent Pamela Rutledge, director of the Media Psychology Research Center, says, “the core assumptions driving educational content are not adapting as fast as the world is changing. Traditional models train people to equate what they do with who they are (i.e., what do you want to be when you grow up) rather than to acquire critical thinking and flexible skills and attitudes that fit a rapidly changing world.”

Of course, we don’t know exactly what kind of jobs will be available in the age of automation.  Many of today’s most in-demand jobs did not exist ten, or even five, years ago. As the WEF notes, “by one popular estimate, 65% of children entering primary school today will ultimately end up working in completely new job types that don’t yet exist.”

How do we prepare ourselves for jobs that don’t yet exist? It’s going to require a different way of looking at education, training and workforce strategies.

In short, we’re in a brand new world. But we have a pretty good idea of how people can thrive in this world. They need to acquire the new skills that will help them work with and alongside computers. And they need to be agile in retraining as the job market shifts and new jobs emerge. On the institutional side, business, education and political leaders need to understand what’s coming and set out policies that will help people get the skills they need to succeed. It’s particularly urgent to open up education and training opportunities to a much greater share of the population.

The age of automation is here and there’s no turning back. The future of work holds many opportunities for those willing to learn and adapt.